Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Assault of Daniel Nivel


 * 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. There is consensus that this topic has received sustained coverage. (non-admin closure) SST  flyer  05:51, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Assault of Daniel Nivel

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

NOT NEWS;  DGG ( talk ) 21:48, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep This wasn't written when this was in the news, as it happened in 1998. I first read about it in a football encyclopedia when I was a child. This was not an average case because Germans have less of a hooligan reputation than the English and European policemen very rarely nearly lose their life like this. This event was serious enough for German authorities to take a collective guilt for it, with Nivel being invited as their guest of honour years later. Also, an organisation was made in his name. WP:NOTNEWS is repeatedly being used as a knee-jerk to anything that happens recently, and in this case something that happened 18 years ago. &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 21:58, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * No, nOT NEWS is about anything that has no lasting effect. The article would need to show coverage beyond the immediate time period.  DGG ( talk ) 00:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe look at the legacy section and then maybe google the name and see mentions in years since &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 12:56, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The "not news" is not applicable here. Germany set up a foundation in his name. He has been invited to attend games with the German chancellor. There were several trials. The assault continues to be written about. Arguing no "coverage beyond the immediate time period" is without any relevance to the facts, to be frank. Jeppiz (talk) 20:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure the deleters are reading the same article. There is a legacy section including events from 2006 and 2016 and the foundation of an organisation. A google search can freshen the mind as well. &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 20:55, 12 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. I am not much of a speaker of English so maybe I should not speak up here; still it's fact that the article has been in the French and German wikipedias since 2006, and in the Arabic since 2007, so I find the argument NOT NEWS a bit far out, to say the least. -- Renardo la vulpo (talk) 23:22, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * each WP has a different standard of notability and slightly different rules about BLP.  DGG ( talk ) 00:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * So are we talking about BLP, notability, or No news? You were arguing "NOT NEWS" (eight characters for a deletion request, imagine!), and now you are shifting to notability, and as an aside you mention "biographies". Please be precise. -- Renardo la vulpo (talk) 01:34, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * BLP has no relevance here, that is for what can be said about living people to protect against legal action. This should not be nominated under biographies because it is not a biography, a municipal policeman is not a notable person, him being beaten half to death in a cross-border criminal trial for which Germany feels guilt 20 years later is. This nomination is an utter farce. &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 20:55, 12 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete This is an article on an incident that was just a passing news incident with no lasting inport.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Please, what's an "inport"? Merriam Webster doesn't list it, and a web search returns only very technical hits. I would be grateful to learn. Of course I agree that it's no lasting effect if in 2016 the German football association invites him as an honorary guest; certainly they issue several such invitations for each championship. That cannot be counted as a criterion. Still, what is the argument for the deletion request: BLP, notability, or news? Or the fact that the article is named "assault of…" rather than after a person (such as in Arabic, French, and German)? An article named "assault of…" might be rejected for momentariness while an article about a person might be rejected for notability. A moving target is hard to focus. -- Renardo la vulpo (talk) 02:40, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * It is a typo, he means no lasting import - i.e. no lasting importance. EdChem (talk) 10:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Restructure: This could be made into an article on the Daniel Nivel Foundation, founded by FIFA and which is collaborating on hooliganism at the 2016 world cup. The materials in this article largely fit as history.  DE article on Nivel and on the Nivel Cup might provide suitable additional references.  EdChem (talk) 10:48, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Obvious and speedy Keep We have lots of articles on more non-noticable attacks. This was a major news story at the time, and it has continued to appear in international press. Only today, Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet has an entire article on the assault of Daniel Nivel . It is clearly notable, there are lots of RS sources about it, and continues to appear in RS sources almost 20 years after the assault. Absolutely no reason to delete it. The nomination is so bad (just two words) and the argument for keeping it so strong that I think it should be a speedy keep. No need to waster much time on something so obvious Jeppiz (talk) 20:32, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:NOTNEWS does not apply to an incident that happened 20 years ago. There is an eponymous organisation was made in his name. Passes WP:CRIME with persistent coverage of the event. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:15, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Nivel receives ongoing coverage in the German media. While he may not receive much coverage in English-speaking media his case is still often referred to in Germany. As this article (in German) states he was at Germany's opening came of UEFA 2016 yesterday. Calistemon (talk) 15:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - The references show significant coverage not confined to a brief time period. --Jakob (talk)  aka Jakec  00:34, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:01, 16 June 2016 (UTC)


 * 'Keep - looks to be notable. GiantSnowman 07:18, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Just the references in the article indicate sustained coverage in significant news outlets over a long period of time. Fenix down (talk) 07:35, 17 June 2016 (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.