Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tova Ascher


 * 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 speedy keep. withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) MaxnaCarter (talk) 06:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Tova Ascher

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Very poor low quality referencing, passing mentions and interviews. One film won an award. Potentially notable.  scope_creep Talk  15:08, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women,  and Israel. Shellwood (talk) 16:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * keep. Exactly. Potentially notable. therefore keep. I am surprized a long time editor does not know such basic things. The article is reasonably referenced. "Passing mentions" you must be kidding. There are lots of Israeli newspapers writing discussing this particular case of the major Israeli literary award. And there is nothing wrong with itterviews, which mean the person is notable. I promise when I see an interview with User:Scope_creep about their award, I will write a Wikipedia article about them despite the fact that this person is stalking me. Loew Galitz (talk) 17:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Refs are primary, passing mentions or profile or event listing. I hope somebody will come along and offer 2 or 3 secondary sources but currently she not notable and fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV and WP:V. If you state I'm stalking you again and I'll take your straight up to WP:ANI and make a complaint about you directly to the WMF for breaking the code of conduct. I suggest your retract that aspersion.    scope_creep Talk  17:26, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, disagreed, but I will no go into bickering. Let other people !vote. As for "stalking", that's not an aspersion, but an observation. YOu are messing with several my articles in an unpleasant way. In one case you caused a severe disruption and I spend almost an hour to fix it and you simply ignored my message in your talk page, which is indicative of your attitude towards me. There are zillions of edits in wikipedia and somehow you are on top of mine every day. What shall I think? Loew Galitz (talk) 18:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak delete Keep - the article includes mention of several nominations for a notable award for editing, but I am also concerned about the quality, independence and depth of the sources that I have been able to find. I found a 2017 Jerusalem Post review for the film she directed and co-wrote, a one-graf review of the film in a 2015 Variety article discussing a film festival, the 2015 Times of Israel 2-graf review and report of the film winning the Israel Critics’ Forum Award in an article about another film festival, and a mention in a 2016 Forward article about another film festival. The Screen Daily interview relates to the same film and includes one graf of independent content at the beginning of the article that notes highlights from her editing career, then summarizes the film in two grafs, and then is an interview (not independent), although it does include the biographical detail of her daughter. There are also database entries and another interview in the article, based on my Google translations, and a reference that does not verify a film festival award. This does not appear sufficient to support WP:GNG/WP:BASIC nor WP:CREATIVE notability, but additional secondary sources focused on her and her career would shift my !vote. Beccaynr (talk) 22:32, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I am beginning to understand the two votes above after your detailed explanation. What your argument essentially boils down to is that here we have a WP:BLP1E case. But it this case the correct solution is to redirect to A.K.A Nadia , not "delete". But I would still disagree with this, because many sources describe her as a notable film editor with over 40 films in her portfolio even before her debut as director. Loew Galitz (talk) 23:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I updated my !vote to keep due to the multiple award nominations, the critical attention for AKA Nadia, the national cinema encyclopedia, and this source mentioning her in context: Women Directed Just 11 Percent of Films Screened in Israel in 2017 (Haaretz, 2018, "Of the 36 new Israeli films that played in the country’s theaters last year, only six (16 percent) were directed by women."), as well as reviews for films she has edited, e.g. Variety, 2003 (comments on her editing), NYT, 2005, NYT, 2009, Hollywood Reporter 2010, NYT, 2011, Hollywood Reporter, 2012, which help support her WP:BASIC and WP:CREATIVE notability. Beccaynr (talk) 03:24, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:ANYBIO #3 per biography in the national cinema dictionary and WP:ANYBIO #1 and the WP:GNG per above. Absolutely no case for deletion was made. Intro focuses on references, instead of sources as it should by WP:NEXIST and WP:BEFORE. gidonb (talk) 03:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, she is a really major film director.חוקרת (Researcher) (talk) 07:21, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. In my mind her resume shows the notability even if proper references need to be found.Dan Carkner (talk) 00:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Hi You definently think she is genuinly notable? A lot of those references, is work as an editor and are passing mentions, listing of work positions.      scope_creep Talk  13:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I was thinking about writing 'weak keep', or 'borderline', and it is a collection of circumstances that helped shift my !vote, including my AGF about the national dictionary/encyclopedia, as well as my inability to search in Hebrew and Arabic. However, the Ophir Awards (she has two nominations and a win for her editing) are referred to as the Israeli Oscars in its article, so there seems to be some WP:ANYBIO notability from that, and/or support for WP:CREATIVE#4 "significant critical attention". Also, when I looked again at reviews for films she has edited, I noticed she was often working with the same team, so I see potential for prose to be added to the article about her career. The reviews of films she has edited also seem to help support WP:CREATIVE#3, because her being listed (even though I only found one directly talking briefly about her work) seems to indicate the significance of her role in co-creating the films. However, I would like to see at least two reviews for more than one film. Overall, with this attention for her editing career, I feel comfortable enough that we are outside of WP:BLP1E, so the critical attention for the film she directed and co-wrote then adds to her notability, and after I found the detail of media attention related to a widely-published story about disparities in the industry tailored to filmmaking in Israel, even though she is only listed at the end of the article, it seems to add further context to help boost the significance of her work. As a side note, I am not in favor of a redirect to her film because I am not sure there is sufficient support for WP:NFILM notability at this time, especially if her BLP is kept. On another note, I think this article would benefit from editing for a more neutral, encyclopedic tone, and generally to split her career from her early life/education and personal life, because the current format seems to obscure the notable aspects of her career. Beccaynr (talk) 15:06, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That is a perfect elucidation of the notability policies as they are applicable to this article. Seems to more than borderline, which I thought it was below. I thought perhaps a few more years, i.e. WP:TOOSOON. Thanks. Nomination Withdrawn.  scope_creep Talk  15:48, 30 May 2022 (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.