Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anat Kamm


 * 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   keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. The issue of renaming is currently being discussed on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Anat Kamm

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This article is subject to deletion due to WP:BLP1E. The subject is only being covered in the media as a result of one singular issue. Her life outside of this is non-notable and trivial. Coupled with the BLP issues I saw just skimming the articles makes it clear that delete is required by Wikipedia policy. Basket of Puppies 10:49, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep or rename. The affair that her name is tied to, in which her involvement is critical, is blatantly notable (just look at the ref list and read what it's about). There is no article on the affair other than the Anat Kamm article. While a case can be made to rename the article and shift its focus, there is no grounds for deletion. BLP1E itself states "If the event is significant and the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate biography may be appropriate."  Rami  R  11:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Rami R. A Rename would yield a title like 'The Anat Kamm affair', which is unnecessary descriptional. -DePiep (talk) 11:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or rename. A similar argument to Rami. There might be a weak argument regarding a lack of notability of Anat Kamm herself, but the content itself is mostly notable in any case. --Kmhkmh (talk) 11:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or rename. I think consensus is rapidly building for a rename here.  I had actually suggested this should happen in the past.  Delete would certainly be innappropriate. NickCT (talk) 15:19, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Further to my last note, I've opened a thread to discuss name change. NickCT (talk) 15:25, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep — and rename.   m o n o   23:36, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or rename. Marokwitz (talk) 15:35, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - newsworthy, of course, but also likely to have lasting impact. Bearian (talk) 21:57, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or rename. The issue touches very important issues of free press vs. government policies. It has grown to be associated with Anat Kam and Uri Blau - that is how people are looking for the updates on the situation. Needs to stay.Serge (talk) 11:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.218.7 (talk)


 * Keep חובבשירה (talk) 19:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep User:Richards1052 As main writer of the article & the person who has written very intensively about it in the media & is most aware of the significance of the issues involved, this is a critical issue within Israeli society bearing on freedom of speech, free press, and international law among other issues. There is a serious assault within Israeli society against human rights NGOs & whistleblowers, of which this battle is a part.  I have no problem with renaming it something like "Anat Kamm-Uri Blau Affair" since it involved Haaretz reporter Uri Blau as well.Richard Silverstein (talk) 02:14, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * (Minor edit: Richards1052 into blue link to the User-page) - DePiep (talk) 22:05, 29 May 2010 (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.