Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Kokoeva

Amanda Kokoeva

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Delete 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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Delete This person is not notable at all. Tavix (talk) 21:39, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails notability and there's also a strong smell of POV. andy (talk) 22:35, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Strong delete It's libel in the U.S. The article does not reflect the Video. Jason3777 (talk) 00:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]