323:- Notable enough to be censored for 22 years, and to generate political pressure in Russia to keep a more recent work unpublished. If he's been heard of in the Kremlin I'd say that's pretty darn notable. Has written several works. If we are not familiar with him in the west, does not mean he is not notable. Remember
579:
If one of his works is on
Stanford University Library Database would you not say that is evidence enough of notability? And as the content regarding his one of his works being censored for 22 years is verifiable then should we not regard his notability as self-evident on that ground? I'll be happy to
519:
What? Did no-one actually look at the article, everything is sourced reliably. Look at the links - Standford
University - Library and Academic Resources (SU-LAIR) for example. Would not be on Stanford's database if he was not notable. Will continue to look for reviews etc. Please remove from deletion
471:
with show significant coverage of the article subject, present them, there is no reason to be coy. Examples of his work are not really relevant, what we need are reviews of his work, awards he has received, coverage of him in newspapers and magazines, that kind of thing. Russian sources are fine, but
665:
3 of the "references" in the article were circular citations to wikipedia clones. The ones that remain are simply pages that state the book exists, not why it should be notable. The marginal cost to include a book in a database rounds to zero. Furthermore, I read the google translation of the one
646:
Stanford
University is a reliable source, it has limited financial resources so does not include every book published. As a University it would obviously want to include only works of scholarly importance. We know they would not list every book published. So it is not simply a case that he has just
448:
Most likely an issue with the spelling of his name, try in
Russian - ΠΠ°Π»Π΅ΡΠΈΠΉ ΠΠΈΡ
Π°ΠΉΠ»ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΡ ΠΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ»Π°Π΅Π²ΡΠΊΠΈΠΉ, or Valerij Nikolaevskij. I have found several links. He is definitely a poet. I have put some of his poetry through babel-fish, into english (probably not best translation) however I think this is
757:
Thanks, I would certainly consider doing that in the event of deletion, could you point me to somewhere on wikipedia that gives guidance on how to do that. However in the meantime would you be prepared to consider keeping the article for a little while longer and adding the
601:
Please review the relevant policies. Having a book listed in the
Stanford University Library Database does not establish the notability of the author, and lack of significant coverage in reliable sources is pretty much the definition of lack of notability.
647:
published a book. It is also kept for perusal by scholars. He has had several books published, and according to a reliable independent academic source linked to in the article one of those was censored for 22 years. Here is what
727:
references in google suggest that he's not a notable subject. I suggest that since you have such a keen interest, if the article is deleted, that you create an account and request the article be moved to your user space.
160:
196:
778:
It is not up to me whether or not to keep the article. If it is deleted, you can request that the person that closes it move it. Not all such requests are honored. You can also ask that a deletion be reviewed at
192:
431:
Well, I know that the article has no reliable sources, and that when I search Google for him in news, books, and scholar, I get 0 hits. That does not bode well for establishment of his notability.
580:
expand the references, as suitable material is located. A quick Google search is no indication of notability or lack of it. Lack of coverage is not necessarily the same as lack of notability
849:
Lack of search results above are due to variations in spelling of his name: I ran another search and it has come up with more results. These need to be checked more thoroughly.
384:
I read german, the two sources you provide establish that he is the author of a couple of books, and nothing more. Being a author does not translate automatically to notability.
667:
154:
115:
262:
236:
695:
I don't wish to quarrel, I have looked at the academic site, and yes it links to wikipedia, which I had not noticed at first. In discussing this lets remember
120:
88:
83:
417:
so let's not be hasty. It's easy enough to add a few 's to the article which i shall do. I suggest we let it stay, till more research is done.
92:
852:
821:
765:
710:
652:
587:
521:
454:
418:
371:
327:
75:
701:]. I shall take out the reference link I put in, it wasn't done to provoke. However it would be good idea to retain the article and add
559:. IMO, the sources in the article do not meet these criteria. The mere fact that the subject has published works does not meet the bar.
705:
to see if there can be some further sources not available online located. We need to remember that
Knowledge is a work in progress
175:
142:
366:
I have been attempting to find out more. A lot of the webpages are difficult to translateΒ : However he is listed at the EBSEES
17:
345:, have you got any sources for any of that? Significant coverage in reliable sources is the primary criterion for notability.
221:
723:
Well, I was at one time an expert in comparative literature, and the mere fact that he's a living person and there are
311:
370:]. Without translating this it would be difficult to estimate his notability. Could be important. Let's not be hasty.
136:
669:
identifying the views as fringe. Therefore, I am now even more firmly convinced the article should be deleted per
860:
829:
795:
773:
740:
718:
682:
660:
641:
614:
595:
571:
529:
484:
462:
443:
426:
396:
379:
357:
335:
315:
298:
277:
251:
226:
200:
57:
875:
780:
696:
36:
132:
874:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
856:
825:
769:
714:
656:
591:
525:
458:
422:
375:
331:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
79:
182:
678:
637:
307:
71:
63:
648:
324:
53:
583:
520:
to give time for thorough research to be done. 2.45 am here, can't work all through the night! Thanks
702:
168:
219:
148:
790:
735:
674:
633:
609:
566:
479:
438:
391:
352:
293:
273:
247:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
820:
Ok, no problem. Will wait and see the outcome, thanks for explaining the options available.
673:. I will not respond to any further comments unless they include a reliable source linked.
670:
629:
556:
210:
191:
Notability of the person is not proved. The article in ru.wiki is deleted in cause of this.
49:
706:
214:
786:
731:
605:
562:
475:
468:
434:
387:
348:
289:
269:
243:
109:
552:
628:
No reliable sources. Publishing a book is not grounds for notability per
868:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
709:. I have only come to this article last night for the first.
286:, I can find no reliable sources covering the subject.
105:
101:
97:
167:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
878:). No further edits should be made to this page.
181:
8:
263:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
237:list of Poetry-related deletion discussions
257:
231:
306:agree..cannot show sufficient notability
261:: This debate has been included in the
235:: This debate has been included in the
472:I ask that you provide translations.
413:Yes, but we don't know a lot on this
7:
24:
453:. Let's give this a bit of time.
666:seller page that had a "review"
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
762:template (see discussion page)
1:
861:17:21, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
830:15:58, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
796:15:53, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
774:15:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
741:15:03, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
719:14:59, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
683:13:10, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
661:12:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
642:02:59, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
615:12:23, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
596:02:18, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
572:02:10, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
530:01:40, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
485:01:01, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
463:00:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
58:22:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
699:and Don't be inconsiderate
444:23:54, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
427:23:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
397:23:40, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
380:23:22, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
358:23:05, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
336:22:34, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
316:19:33, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
299:17:53, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
278:17:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
252:17:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
227:01:38, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
201:22:10, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
895:
651:was meant to be used for.
781:Knowledge:Deletion_review
871:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
209:He is a non-notable
72:Valery Nikolayevsky
64:Valery Nikolayevsky
697:WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND
44:The result was
586:comment added by
308:Infinitely Humble
280:
266:
254:
240:
886:
873:
794:
739:
613:
598:
570:
483:
469:reliable sources
442:
395:
356:
297:
267:
241:
217:
193:Andrei Romanenko
186:
185:
171:
123:
113:
95:
34:
894:
893:
889:
888:
887:
885:
884:
883:
882:
876:deletion review
869:
784:
729:
603:
581:
560:
473:
432:
385:
346:
287:
224:
215:
128:
119:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
892:
890:
881:
880:
864:
863:
853:62.254.133.139
843:
842:
841:
840:
839:
838:
837:
836:
835:
834:
833:
832:
822:62.254.133.139
807:
806:
805:
804:
803:
802:
801:
800:
799:
798:
766:62.254.133.139
760:expert-subject
748:
747:
746:
745:
744:
743:
711:62.254.133.139
703:expert-subject
690:
689:
688:
687:
686:
685:
653:62.254.133.139
649:WP:NOTCENSORED
622:
621:
620:
619:
618:
617:
588:62.254.133.139
549:
548:
547:
546:
545:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
537:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
522:62.254.133.139
500:
499:
498:
497:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
487:
455:62.254.133.139
419:62.254.133.139
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
399:
372:62.254.133.139
361:
360:
339:
338:
328:62.254.133.139
325:WP:NOTCENSORED
318:
301:
281:
255:
229:
222:
189:
188:
125:
121:AfD statistics
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
891:
879:
877:
872:
866:
865:
862:
858:
854:
850:
848:
845:
844:
831:
827:
823:
819:
818:
817:
816:
815:
814:
813:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
797:
792:
788:
782:
777:
776:
775:
771:
767:
763:
761:
756:
755:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
749:
742:
737:
733:
726:
722:
721:
720:
716:
712:
708:
704:
700:
698:
694:
693:
692:
691:
684:
680:
676:
672:
668:
664:
663:
662:
658:
654:
650:
645:
644:
643:
639:
635:
631:
627:
624:
623:
616:
611:
607:
600:
599:
597:
593:
589:
585:
578:
577:
576:
575:
574:
573:
568:
564:
558:
554:
551:The issue is
531:
527:
523:
518:
517:
516:
515:
514:
513:
512:
511:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
504:
503:
502:
501:
486:
481:
477:
470:
466:
465:
464:
460:
456:
452:
447:
446:
445:
440:
436:
430:
429:
428:
424:
420:
416:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
407:
406:
405:
398:
393:
389:
383:
382:
381:
377:
373:
369:
367:
365:
364:
363:
362:
359:
354:
350:
344:
341:
340:
337:
333:
329:
326:
322:
319:
317:
313:
309:
305:
302:
300:
295:
291:
285:
282:
279:
275:
271:
264:
260:
256:
253:
249:
245:
238:
234:
230:
228:
225:
220:
218:
212:
208:
205:
204:
203:
202:
198:
194:
184:
180:
177:
174:
170:
166:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
138:
134:
131:
130:Find sources:
126:
122:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
870:
867:
846:
759:
724:
675:Sailsbystars
634:Sailsbystars
625:
550:
467:If you have
450:
414:
368:] also here
342:
320:
303:
283:
258:
232:
206:
190:
178:
172:
164:
157:
151:
145:
139:
129:
45:
43:
31:
28:
582:βPreceding
321:Strong Keep
155:free images
50:Ron Ritzman
553:notability
671:WP:FRINGE
630:WP:AUTHOR
557:WP:AUTHOR
451:important
270:β’ Gene93k
244:β’ Gene93k
584:unsigned
343:Question
223:Contribs
216:Armbrust
116:View log
847:Comment
787:Nuujinn
732:Nuujinn
606:Nuujinn
563:Nuujinn
476:Nuujinn
435:Nuujinn
388:Nuujinn
349:Nuujinn
290:Nuujinn
161:WPΒ refs
149:scholar
89:protect
84:history
707:WP:WIP
626:Delete
555:, see
304:Delete
284:Delete
211:author
207:Delete
133:Google
93:delete
46:delete
176:JSTOR
137:books
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
857:talk
826:talk
791:talk
770:talk
736:talk
715:talk
679:talk
657:talk
638:talk
610:talk
592:talk
567:talk
526:talk
480:talk
459:talk
439:talk
423:talk
392:talk
376:talk
353:talk
332:talk
312:talk
294:talk
274:talk
259:Note
248:talk
233:Note
197:talk
169:FENS
143:news
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
415:yet
268:--
242:--
183:TWL
118:β’
114:β (
859:)
851:]
828:)
785:--
783:.
772:)
764:]
730:--
725:no
717:)
681:)
659:)
640:)
632:.
604:--
594:)
561:--
528:)
474:--
461:)
433:--
425:)
386:--
378:)
347:--
334:)
314:)
288:--
276:)
265:.
250:)
239:.
213:.
199:)
163:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
48:.
855:(
824:(
793:)
789:(
768:(
738:)
734:(
713:(
677:(
655:(
636:(
612:)
608:(
590:(
569:)
565:(
524:(
482:)
478:(
457:(
441:)
437:(
421:(
394:)
390:(
374:(
355:)
351:(
330:(
310:(
296:)
292:(
272:(
246:(
195:(
187:)
179:Β·
173:Β·
165:Β·
158:Β·
152:Β·
146:Β·
140:Β·
135:(
127:(
124:)
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.