Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/February 2003 Saddam Hussein interview

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. Better sourcing seems to be requested, though – will be tagging this for that. (non-admin closure) TLA (talk) 08:49, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2003 Saddam Hussein interview

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NEVENTS per the conditions in WP:COVERAGE. The article was created in 2005 and has been sparsely edited in the 20 years since. There has not been subsequent in-depth coverage that puts the interview into context, such as is often found in books, feature length articles in major news magazines and does not appear to have the lasting significance that notable interviews with other political figures have had, such as An Interview with HRH The Princess of Wales, Nixon interviews, Betty Ford's August 1975 60 Minutes interview, Palin–Couric interviews. True, the interview was on the eve of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, but nothing said during the interview or the coverage seems to point to its lasting notability. Longhornsg (talk) 07:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Journalism, Iraq, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 07:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Events. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Spencerk + historical NAADAAN (talk) 12:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - This event meets notability for it's geo-political context, as a controversial event in journalism, and also as a notable event in television history. Agree that page could be punched-up to include context. See the recent documentary The big interview The panel on the interview in 2008 at National Conference for Media Reform, Rathers' Trustees Award nomination It was extremely controversial, at the time. The CBS CEO called it "It was the craziest sweeps in the history of show business"1. A number of details provided in the interview provided new information about diplomacy leading up to the war. Please consider the scale of the events leading up to the war, and the role of this interview in prime-time news. 1 2 3 4 5 I presume it's recent attention this week is due to its comparisons with the recent Putin-Carlson interview. For recent reflections, see op-eds in 2017, lists of most famous interviews, etc. That's just a bit of googling, but please see the google books results for the full-illustration of how noteworthy the event was in modern history. I'm happy to improve the article, to add the historical context that is required WP:NOTPAPER cheers Spencerk (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Spencerk. This was important at the time, and notability is not temporary. The existing state of the article is not a reason for deletion; as long as sources exist (WP:NEXIST). Toughpigs (talk) 12:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The article most certainly does not fail WP:MILL or WP:10YT. However the sourcing is very bad, and the highlights outtake is entirely subjective. Geschichte (talk) 08:53, 16 February 2024 (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.