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. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 17:35, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Molhem Barakat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I believe that this is a case of being famous for only one thing, being a young photo journalist. Also feel that this could be a case of WP:NOT#NEWS Gbawden (talk) 11:41, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep As a cursory Google search can show, there is wide coverage of his death, not being a young photojournalist. Furthermore, many of the articles discuss how Reuters was irresponsible for putting such a young life in harm's way. Namiba didn't give a reason when they contested the deletion, but they also don't find this a case of NOTNEWS. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as Ktr noted, Barakat's death has been profiled by international publications, policy journals and other verifiable sources.--TM 13:21, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I expanded per the above. Widespread non-trivial coverage easily establishes notability in this case. Nikthestunned 16:10, 10 September 2014 (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.