Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Kokoeva


 * 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 and Redirect to 2008 South Ossetia War. Glass  Cobra  17:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Amanda Kokoeva

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Subject is a juvenile that was interviewed once. This is simply not notable enough for an article, and beyond that, appears to be POV pushing. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 15:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Do not delete. The YouTube video has more than eight hundred thousand views. - jehobu 8/17/2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jehobu (talk • contribs) 17:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)  — Jehobu (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Strong delete & liberal sprinking of salt per nom. Looks like a case of WP:BLP1E and a WP:COATRACK for some overt POV pushing. nancy  talk 17:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Completely agree on WP:BLP1E and WP:COATRACK. However I think the article should be renamed rather than deleted. This incident is significant enough to be described in Wikipedia. And, of course, the article should be cleaned from that strong POV bias it contains right now. --Mgar (talk) 09:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * My !vote stands but I agree that after deletion the article should be recreated as a fully-protected redirect to 2008_South_Ossetia_War per PeaceNT below. nancy (talk) 05:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

*Strong delete It's libel in the U.S. The article does not reflect the Video. Jason3777 (talk) 00:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Do not delete. This article covers a significant view of some US officials on Ossetia 2008 war. Again, the journalist was speculating on the fact that Georgian troops initially started the war. Google now shows 'Amanda Kokoeva' results, but don't forget how much time has been passed since. Again, there is a link on that article on 2008 Ossetia page - i feel that all sides of the conflict should be covered equally Sorcen (talk) 17:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC) — Sorcen (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Strong delete This is an editorial masquerading as a biographical article without any actual biographical details. Any relevant information (though I'm unclear if there is any) can be merged into 2008 South Ossetia War. A  ni  Mate  18:44, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge a reference - if appropriate - into 2008 South Ossetia War. A line max will do. This article is supposed to be about Amanda Kokoeva, not an excuse to air the speculations of US officials and a journalist. The child's only notable action has been to give her opinion about the war on one brief TV interview.  The number of people who visit a website later to see a repeat of this interview is utterly irrelevant.  Ka renjc 21:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete This person is not notable at all. Tavix (talk) 21:39, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Fails notability and there's also a strong smell of POV. andy (talk) 22:35, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:COATRACK and WP:BLP1E. This is a POV article.  As an aside, someone removed the AfD from the article; I've restored it. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 23:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Rename possibly. The censorship and extreme anti-Russian bias in such a public way is notable IMO. --Tocino 00:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree. But we should change the article, not delete it, because event itself has some significancy. Russian foreign office widely uses this case as a propaganda, Wikipedia should describe what really happened. --Mgar (talk) 09:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I would agree with you, but I can't find any NPOV sources. All we have are the video and totally inaccurate POV statements about it. Anyone who understands English and watches the video should plainly see that the text doesn't agree. Without sources, one cannot write an article per WP:OR. How does one explain U.S. commercial breaks where all the news organizations break at the same time to keep their audience from channel skipping? It's standard operating procedure here. I've watched Studio B for years and I never remember seeing them bring someone back to finish their comments (and they did it in the last 30 seconds of the show). And this preempted the program's normal sign-off segment - an unprecedented event in my years of viewing the program. But I can find no sources that say this. How can one combat propaganda with what is simply Common Knowledge in the U.S.? Jason3777 (talk) 21:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I found one source released today: http://pulitzercenter.typepad.com/untold_stories/2008/08/amandas-video-o.html, although it sounds more like an editorial then a news article. Jason3777 (talk) 22:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That site wouldn't be useful as a source, since it is simply a blog, even if for the Pulitzer Center. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 22:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

*Delete This person is not notable per WP:ONEEVENT. Changed my reasoning because my stated objections have been corrected. Jason3777 (talk) 18:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge due to write up of NYT article posted by Fomels. It should be put with Russian press media bias/"control" Where it is already addressed in the main article 2008_South_Ossetia_war.Jason3777 (talk) 20:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete: I have added a link to another interview given by the girl, Amanda, on ABC news, and she and her aunt give the same account as the article reflects. There is also a video with the ABC news link of that interview.  I also echo the sentiments of the person who stated the censorship in such a public way is very notable, and frankly a bit disturbing.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MiaCulpa (talk • contribs) 04:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)  — MiaCulpa (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Strong Delete and Salt Clear attempt to engage in propaganda. Subject would not merit an article (see WP:BLP1E). Salt as well, due to repeated recreation following previous deletions. RayAYang (talk) 05:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge into 2008 South Ossetia War I was looking for information on this person, right now she will be world famous in the next few days because of how fox news handled her interview and how they cut her off after her opinion was not what they wanted to hear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcintomasz (talk • contribs) 05:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Do not delete! To delete this article means destroy the last isle of truth. Europeans & Americans are proud of freedom of speech, but its noncence that what they speak on FOX, CNN, BBC etc is damn FAR from truth about conflict. I have my grandpa in Tskhinvali and he was telling me how everything started from Gergian side - firs GRADs, then tanks and troops. There is no more my native town, there is no more many of my friends. We should make a seperate article on S.Osetia-Goergia conflict and use this material as the proof. Until that we haven't any moral rights to delete the article. 3bigs (talk) 06:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC) — 3bigs (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete per above. There's enough about her on the main page of the war.  This page can always be recreated if she _does_ become a sensation, but remember that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball so we can't assume any future notability. Themfromspace (talk) 08:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The incident is significant enough. The article is not about person but about the case that became quite famous. Maybe it should be reflected in the name. Of course, the article currently contains very strong POV, and that should be cleaned. --Mgar (talk) 09:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * This does not seem to indicate that this is a case that has become "quite famous". Further, I'd challenge editors to find sources that aren't anti-Fox News, anti-Bush administration, etc, since pushing such POVs makes them unfit as sources here (can't build an NPOV article with POV sources). Really, the only thing that makes this famous is that some have chosen to ignore certain technical aspects of television news and are holding this up as an example of impropriety in the media. Actually, that's a pretty common charge amongst any number of groups...nothing special here. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 14:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Completely agree with you about POV and need to find neutral sources. However I am for cleaning the article, not deleting it. About famous - please see Google search in Russian. It became quite an issue there. And while I agree with you what made it famous, the point is if it's famous, not why it's famous. --Mgar (talk) 15:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No. Even if it's notable, which I very much doubt, the article is pure propaganda. Not everything that is "famous" can be published, and a lot of famous stories are untrue. I completely agree with Huntster, and further to my earlier !vote I now think the article should be salted. WP is not the place for the Russians and Georgians to bring their fight. andy (talk) 17:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No, the article is not propaganda. The current contain of the article is propaganda, and that must be changed. The deletion decision is about notability of an event, not about current POV state of an article. That is my point. --Mgar (talk) 17:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's FoxNews. They cut off people who disagree with them all the time. Bill O'Reilly is famous for it. This onscreen event isn't notable. A  ni  Mate  20:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Almost a million people saw this on YouTube, so you can't just shrug it off, and it does bring up some interesting points about news coverage in this country. Fix refs, npov, style -- sure; rewrite, rename -- probably; delete -- no. Guinness man (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As has been stated before, YouTube hits are pretty much meaningless...heck, even the article says the viewer numbers seem to have been fiddled with. The problem with the article is not just that it is POV, but that given what sources seem to be available to work with, it appears the article is irredeemably POV, with little to no chance that it can be pulled out of its current state. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 14:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. This cannot be ignored, it shows the complete disregard to equality in the American media and it helps show the 'other' side that is hidden from the American viewers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Solonmonkey (talk • contribs) 17:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)  — Solonmonkey (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Please, do not delete!.This article deals with freedom of speech. And if you delete it it will be clear that there's no freedom of speech left in the US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.55.100.32 (talk) 18:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)  — 212.55.100.32 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:RECENT.M0RD00R (talk) 20:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge per User:Karenjc, but don't make it too big. Make it notable, however, in the Censorship in the United States article. KNewman (talk) 21:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You'd have to have something proving it was censorship for it to be in that article. Shepard Smith said the cut was due to a hard break and end of program, and right or wrong, to state in an article that it is otherwise is not only a POV, but original research. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 22:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete again, and for the same reason it was speedied: absolutely no credible evidence of notability by reference to non-trivial reliable independent sources. Guy (Help!) 16:49, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete the article is not notable in itself, though I would support the creation of an article concerning the various allegations of propoganda/distortion in the war (Georgian, Russian, Western Media). On her own she doesn't seem to merit an article by the current notability standards (also either the the youtube clip which says she is 12 or the birthdate in the article which gives her birthdate as 1994 are wrong). In general the article is poorly constructed, and if it is kept needs to be largely rewritten. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 10:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. The incident is significant enough. --Fnaq (talk) 11:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC) — Fnaq (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Rename and Keep. This article is not about Amanda, but about the incident (per Mgar). The case is widely discussed by Russian mainstream media, video is showed on TV: Channel One (Russia),  Vesti All-Russia State Television and Radio Company,  TV Center,  Voice of Russia,  RIA Novosti,  Interfax,  Echo of Moscow,  Izvestia,  Novaya Gazeta,  Komsomolskaya Pravda,  Newsru,  Rossiyskaya Gazeta,  Nezavisimaya Gazeta,  gazeta.ru. It's very notable incident. -- Esp rus2 (talk) 13:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep.This incident is very important. Many peoples see this video, and many peoples may want to read about Amanda. --RussianNeuroMancer (talk) 16:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC) — RussianNeuroMancer (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep and probably rename (to be an article about the incident, not about the girl). - Amikeco (talk) 21:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a whole new article. Unless someone does a rewrite very quickly, this afd is about the article as it stands, not what it might be/could have been/should be. andy (talk) 21:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep.This article covers a significant view of some US officials on Ossetia 2008 war. Americans are proud of freedom of speech, but its noncence that what they speak on FOX, CNN, BBC etc is damn FAR from truth about conflict. This incident is very important for all. 87.224.253.99 (talk) 07:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC) av — 87.224.253.99 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * And so how does your opinion that the media bends the truth make this article any more notable? The incident may be notable, and we do have an article on it, but this particular incident is not. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 08:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. It's not that's she's notable for only one incident.  As far as I can tell from the article, she's never done anything notable.  If you're complaining Fox is biased, put it in the Fox article, using reliable sources. Superm401 - Talk 13:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Rename. This article must be not about human (which one has no notability), but about incedent - currently it rised up in Russia - at least 4 different national channles shows it with comments. #!George Shuklin (talk) 13:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:COATRACK and WP:BLP1E. Wikipedia is not a forum for demonstrating the alleged bias of news broadcasts. This girl is not by any definition notable. Languagehat (talk) 15:30, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Rename Let it remain as an evidence of the Russian media paranoia. Fomels (talk) 19:30, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep and probably rename. Very important piece of media campaign during the war. It's huge in Russia - everybody talks about this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mixer (talk • contribs) 00:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * And therefore it probably deserves a brief mention in the entry on the incident. It certainly does not deserve its own article, any more than any other individual media response. Languagehat (talk) 14:59, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Most new articles are about persons, Is anyone mentioned in a newspaper deserves a page--PuTTYSch OOL 19:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It is better to re-write the article about "Georgia" --PuTTYSch OOL 19:22, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - per WP:BLP1E and WP:COATRACK and major POV issues as this reads as a baseless attack on Fox News --T-rex 20:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. A notable Internet phenomenon sparking a controversy on a very significant issue. The girl was later interviewed by a Russian TV station and attracted a lot media buzz in the country - can anyone translate the relevant information from the Russian version of the article (it is well sourced)? The Deceiver (talk) 20:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to 2008_South_Ossetia_War, where this event is already covered. Notable news, but doesn't make the person notable. BLP1E applies. If there's more information later, a separate article about the event can be recreated. This article is currently all about the event anyway, definitely not a biography. --PeaceNT (talk) 04:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.