Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Your Worst Animal Nightmares


 * 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. Sources provided counter nom and vote citing nom. Star  Mississippi  02:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Your Worst Animal Nightmares

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

Deprodded with addition of Common Sense Media review, but sourcing is minimal otherwise Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete we do not have enough sourcing here to create a quality article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:35, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The review notes: "The show is pretty violent, with frequent scenes of people being chased, attacked, bitten, and/or eaten alive. Victims (many of whom are the actual attack survivors) are shown screaming in fear and pain, throwing up, and having other panicked reactions. Some of these moments are replayed several times in a single segment in order to make the story even more shocking."  The review notes: "The description for last night’s premiere of Your Worst Animal Nightmares: “Camp Terror; Blood Bath.” That sounded enticing so I had to watch. Animal Planet’s new docudrama series does not make people’s hypothetical worst nightmares happen. The subjects are actual victims and the show jumps from news footage of their real-life accidents (crocodile attacks Australian campers; Great White Shark “silently stalks” four teens) to interviews with the victims and their families. But the bulk of the air time involves really, really, really horrific dramatizations of the accidents themselves."  This is a 400-word review of Your Worst Animal Nightmares. The review notes: "I continue to wait. Eight minutes to go. Graphic bloodshed is coming, this is Your Worst Animal Nightmares after all. "As I near the shallower water I cast a look over my right shoulder and saw the shark veer away from the jagged inshore rocks," he says.  Seriously? That's it? The extent of his "nightmare" was a minor self-inflicted knife wound? Harrowing. But wait, that's not all. Morris has nightmares about the ordeal and eventually goes to Australia to conquer his fear by swimming with sharks while he's in a cage. As the sixth episode in the series I can only assume things are going to get worse. Apparently the next episode is about a woman who gets dog saliva on her new jacket." Less significant coverage:  The article provides 65 words of coverage about the subject. The article notes: "Your Worst Animal Nightmares (TV3, Mondays) depicted 18-year-old Nick Peterson being attacked by a Great White shark off the South Australian coast. It was long on reconstruction and short on education. I waited for a lesson on "how to avoid being eaten" but it never came, though Nick's family and friends will live with the horror of his death for the rest of their lives."  The article notes: "Stainton (pictured), who witnessed Irwin's death in a stingray attack in September 2006, is now filming Your Worst Animal Nightmares, for The Discovery Channel.  While the series will feature dramatic re-enactments of highly-publicised animal encounters, Stainton has stated he will stay away from Irwin's fatal end on the Great Barrier Reef. ... The pilot, which featured the headlined story in 2005 of a young mum who jumped on top of a crocodile north of Cooktown to save her son's friend, impressed TV executives for its sympathetic treatment of the animal."</li> </ol></li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Your Worst Animal Nightmares to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 08:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC) </li></ul>


 * Comment: Pinging, who removed the proposed deletion and added the Common Sense Media and Entertainment Weekly sources to the article. Cunard (talk) 08:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per the citations listed by Cunard. Donald D23   talk to me  18:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.