Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrawos Bassous (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. MBisanz ^talk 00:18, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Andrawos Bassous

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Forget English, even the Arabic name search has no result in news search. The sources in the articles are only video links. Greek Legend (talk) 01:10, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - What about the sources provided in the article? For example, he seems to have been the subject of interviews by three different TV stations, which are linked. Pretty clearly satisfies GNG. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 02:53, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Three are Youtube links and rest are non-RS videos. Videos are generally used as external links not as reliable source. There must be some article written about him in some reliable source. Articles that people can read not watch. Greek Legend (talk) 03:41, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The first three video links take you directly to the websites of the news outlets, not Youtube. I don't know what you're talking about regarding Youtube. Even if they WERE bare Youtube links (which they're not), or if the underlying code was to a video hosted on Youtube (which plenty of reliable news outlets do), what needs to be considered is the original source. Youtube is just a webhost for videos, and it is irrelevant where a reliable news outlet (in this case, a Danish news outlet and a couple of Arabic-language ones) hosts their videos which are broadcast on their own website. If the video itself is of a news broadcast or a production of the news organization, then the source is the news organization, not Youtube, as Youtube did not produce it. It's also not required to hotlink sources, which eliminates any possible copyright infringement issue. This is unquestionably the greatest misunderstanding on Wikipedia regarding broadcast feed sourcing. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 14:39, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - All the sources provided in the article are from famous & well known TV stations and newspapers such as Norrköpings Tidningar in Sweden. Plus his Facebook page has more than 400K followers and got verified by the Facebook team as a public figure! . Mosheeko talk) 06:09, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I was reading this Wiki article after I saw Andrawos pictures on his Facebook page, he is a well known photographer in Sweden and has been broadcasted on the TV several times, c'mon - all the references are enough. There are not only videos, but there is also an article written in Swedish about him in the newspaper, you can find it at the first reference. Dudu talk) 06:16, 20 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.134.115 (talk) [reply]

Who is this user:Dudu? Greek Legend (talk) 06:17, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks plausibly like a sock given the shared tic with the missing open bracket on the talk link. —Nizolan ^(talk) 12:43, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are suspicious new users in this AFD. Greek Legend (talk) 02:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:17, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In response to The Master: I agree that whether the sources are videos or not is irrelevant. My concern is that a couple of life-interest interviews are not enough to constitute "significant coverage". ~~WP:MUSICBIO explicitly disallows "publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves" as non-trivial independent sources.~~ (struck, see below) The remaining sources are a photo of the subject on a magazine cover when he was 13 (the story itself is seemingly not about Bassous), another interview appearance also from his youth, and a paragraph on a slightly dodgy-looking website ([1]). Those aren't evidence of notability. The subject doesn't pass any of the criteria in WP:CREATIVE either. —Nizolan ^(talk) 12:43, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reply re WP:MUSICBIO: I believe you are misreading the rule. It is referring to promotional and advertising material produced by the musician or his/her business interests. It isn't excluding interviews by significant third parties. On the contrary, being selected for interview by a TV channel or similar is obviously positive evidence of notability. Zero^talk 00:57, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken, but I still don't think that two interviews with the same TV station and an interview with a local newspaper constitute significant coverage. I can't find much else independent on Google. —Nizolan ^(talk) 01:25, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As photographer, he fails WP:CREATIVE. There is no any significant exhibition, he was part of, not new style and no reviews from peers. As for WP:GNG, a couple of interview is not enough. Many people got interviews. In case of TV programs, I'd like to see program about his art and not himself talking. Looks like the case of WP:TOOSOON. No prejudice to recreate the article, when he get more coverage. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 09:13, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the current article is still not convincing of better independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 03:40, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not enough in-depth coverage from independent (interviews don't count, being primary sources), reliable sources to show notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:05, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews DO count and ARE secondary unless he interviewed himself and published or aired himself talking. Your understanding of what constitutes a primary source is completely wrong. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 02:35, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - reliable sourcing, clearly notable photographer. Should be kept per WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 11:14, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
delete fails WP:CREATIVE. YouTube interviews doesn't advance notability. Notable photographers have extensive peer recognition and won major awards. This one hasn't. LibStar (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The deletion rationales that mention "Youtube interviews" are all invalid. The interviews were conducted, recorded and aired by 24NT (Norrköpings Tidningar) TV in Sweden, by Alfalstiniah TV in Pakistan, and a Palestinian TV network. The first two are hosted on the websites of the networks. The third reference points to the video on Youtube, which has NO BEARING on whether or not the original broadcast is considered a reliable source. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 04:32, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.