The result was keep. Tone 18:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability Xenocide Talk| Contributions 21:05, 18 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep - Yes it is indeed notable. Reliable sources are already provided, and the article thereby meets WP:GNG. Many more do exist. Just because these are from foreign papers does not mean they are not RS. There is much more that can be written about this too. Being a stub does not make an article not worthy of inclusion. As for nom's argument, see WP:JNN. Xyz7890 ( talk) 21:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep Not only does it have multiple sources, these are excellent articles on the subject. I don't see any OR here, but having some OR is not grounds for deleting an entire article. Some of the information may be derived from the subject itself. Per WP: PRIMARY, this is permitted for some information in an article with outside sources. Pink cloudy sky ( talk) 20:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Tone 18:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC) reply
No assertion of notability Xenocide Talk| Contributions 21:05, 18 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep - Yes it is indeed notable. Reliable sources are already provided, and the article thereby meets WP:GNG. Many more do exist. Just because these are from foreign papers does not mean they are not RS. There is much more that can be written about this too. Being a stub does not make an article not worthy of inclusion. As for nom's argument, see WP:JNN. Xyz7890 ( talk) 21:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep Not only does it have multiple sources, these are excellent articles on the subject. I don't see any OR here, but having some OR is not grounds for deleting an entire article. Some of the information may be derived from the subject itself. Per WP: PRIMARY, this is permitted for some information in an article with outside sources. Pink cloudy sky ( talk) 20:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC) reply