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 some support for a merge to Snuff film which can appropriately be discussed on the talk page; but the general consensus is to keep this article. ~ mazca ^talk 09:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beheading video

[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Not really a notable subject. I suggest either delete or merge with Snuff Film KMFDM FAN ^(talk!) 16:03, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. -- The leftorium 17:38, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Snuff film per KMFDM FAN. WP:NN as a standalone topic, but coverage could be used in a broader article. -- RUL3R^{*flaming | *vandalism} 17:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Merging this article with snuff film doesn't make sense because snuff films and beheading videos are two different topics, with only a surface similarity. One obvious difference -- snuff films, from all accounts, are for perverse entertainment, while beheading videos are for indoctrinnation/propaganda/inspiring the like-minded. Another obvious difference -- actual beheading videos exist. The snuff film article says there are no documented snuff films that aren't phony. Merging these two topics would be a serious disservice to readers. Frankly, of these two topics, the one on beheading videos is more important. Geo Swan (talk) 06:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge this to Snuff film per, er, everyone. Including the nominator, I notice.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 00:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It would seem to me that these sorts of video are notable, in that morbid curiosity drives many people to view them. They are the topic of news shows. The aspect of the article that currently has merit is the list of videos of this type. Seems like a topic that could be greatly expanded. Deleting the article would delete the edit history which seems completely unwarranted. TeamQuaternion (talk) 01:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 04:37, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, a notable phenomenon. JIP | Talk 09:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.