Knowledge

:Deletion review/Log/2020 September 27 - Knowledge

Source 📝

396:. It is a mix of encyclopedic information and advertising. The only real issue here is whether the article should have been speedily deleted, not how to improve it or whether it should be in article space. It would be reasonable to give the author a choice of draftifying it and taking it through AFC or of trying to improve it in article space, in which case it may be either whacked at or nominated for AFD. This is not the forum to improve the article, only to avoid its speedy deletion. 342:. Completely removed the section - Author of scientific articles and books. I think that it is not needed in the article. I also removed your remark and removed the offer to serve in the army. Highlighted with wiki links films that were on Knowledge. There he is also listed as a producer in the template of each article. I am ready to further correct the article. Please tell me how I can still correct the text. Thanks. 477:- not a great article, reads too much like a resume, but it's not overly promotional; it doesn't really contain any promotional language (puffery) or claims; just doesn't rise to the level of meriting speedy deletion. Someone can take it to AFD if they think the subject is not notable, or they can edit the article if they think it needs improvement. 211:
The deleted version was rather too much of a resume. If I had noticed it I would probably draftified it. I don't think it really had a G11 level of promotion, but it was not a well-written article. There should But if the statements included are accurate (I can't verify the sources in Russian) this
81:
Opinions are divided about whether the deletion should simply be overturned, or whether the content should be sent to draftspace instead. As per the closing instructions, a lack of consensus regarding a speedy deletion means that it should be undone. Editors are free to submit the article to AfD
281:
that influence by citing and quoting independent reviews, or stats on how often these papers are cited, or both. If there are high-quality English-language citations, some should be used. Provide translations of the titles and names of publications of non-English-language sources. And the help
179:
The article was quickly removed for publicity. I unsubscribed on the article discussion page when I saw the deletion template, but no one gave any explanations and the article was deleted. There was no advertisement in the text, if the nominee did not like some of the phrases, it will not be
456:, it might get fixed, or it might get kept (which would be a bit sad, but not crazy). But it is mostly just a list of facts. Not a great article, and certainly too much like a resume, but not all things start out perfect. Are their known or suspected 268:. After that, it depends on how this discussion is closed. But it is not just "some of the phrases" There need to be better sources, and it needs to read like an encyclopedia article, not a resume or a social media profile. 272:
is irrelevant and should go. The bulleted list of unreferened films and TV series should be at the least referenced, and preferably some paragraphs of prose added about at least some of these productions, bases on
155: 413:- an actual article might be possible (this was not it). Sure, it was crappy, misshapen and somewhat promotional but nowhere near the level justifying a speedy deletion. -- 170: 48: 34: 43: 308:
restoration is only to allow people in this discussion to see what the deleted article was like, it should not be edited at all during the discussion.
212:
person was probably notable. There should be no bar to creating a better version, preferably in draft space, or to undeleting and draftifing. So
125: 39: 367:
There is a valid claim for notability and does not appear to be overly promotional. I recommend sending it to AFC for review. --
277:
sources. The section on "Author of scientific articles and books" should select the more significant and influential ones, and
121: 70: 481: 314: 292: 226: 201: 324:
Can I edit the text in the recovered version of the article? Or do I need to wait for the outcome here, and only then edit?
21: 236:
Thanks for the restoration. Please tell me, can you restore the text to the article and help remove advertising phrases?
498: 401: 105: 17: 487: 469: 444: 425: 405: 376: 351: 333: 319: 297: 259: 250:
I ask experienced participants for help. If someone has time, please help me correct the text. Many thanks.
245: 231: 206: 189: 94: 420: 397: 339: 484: 312: 290: 224: 199: 180:
difficult to delete them. The article is significant, please consider its restoration. Thanks.
372: 347: 329: 255: 241: 185: 465: 414: 389: 85: 478: 457: 453: 440: 393: 385: 309: 287: 221: 196: 76: 368: 343: 325: 274: 265: 251: 237: 181: 461: 384:- The issue here is whether the article should have been speedily deleted as 435: 286:
could offer is limited because I can't read the sources.
162: 148: 140: 132: 433:
I have my doubts here, but thre's no harm in trying.
270:
From 1987 to 1989 – served in Border troops in USSR.
452:send to AfD if you will. It might die there via 8: 104:The following is an archived debate of the 63: 269: 264:Not while this review is in progress, 7: 501:of the page listed in the heading. 195:I have temporarily undeleted this. 28: 497:The above is an archive of the 122:Rafael Mikhailovich Minasbekyan 71:Rafael Mikhailovich Minasbekyan 488:22:11, 30 September 2020 (UTC) 470:02:02, 30 September 2020 (UTC) 445:06:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC) 426:04:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC) 406:15:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC) 377:15:19, 28 September 2020 (UTC) 352:13:21, 28 September 2020 (UTC) 334:04:55, 28 September 2020 (UTC) 320:22:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC) 298:22:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC) 260:20:16, 27 September 2020 (UTC) 246:18:36, 27 September 2020 (UTC) 232:18:10, 27 September 2020 (UTC) 207:18:05, 27 September 2020 (UTC) 190:11:33, 27 September 2020 (UTC) 1: 338:Please pay attention to my 95:08:52, 6 October 2020 (UTC) 79:speedy deletion overturned. 524: 388:. It is not exclusively 18:Knowledge:Deletion review 504:Please do not modify it. 111:Please do not modify it. 40:Deletion review archives 411:Revert and draftify 108:of the page above. 365:Restore recreation 511: 510: 316:DESiegel Contribs 294:DESiegel Contribs 228:DESiegel Contribs 203:DESiegel Contribs 93: 59:27 September 2020 49:2020 September 28 35:2020 September 26 515: 506: 423: 417: 214:allow recreation 175: 173: 165: 151: 143: 135: 113: 92: 90: 83: 64: 53: 33: 523: 522: 518: 517: 516: 514: 513: 512: 502: 499:deletion review 475:Overturn speedy 450:Overturn speedy 421: 415: 398:Robert McClenon 317: 295: 229: 204: 169: 167: 161: 160: 154: 147: 146: 139: 138: 131: 130: 109: 106:deletion review 86: 84: 62: 55: 54: 51: 46: 37: 31: 26: 25: 24: 12: 11: 5: 521: 519: 509: 508: 493: 492: 491: 490: 472: 447: 428: 408: 379: 358: 357: 356: 355: 354: 336: 315: 302: 301: 300: 293: 248: 227: 209: 202: 177: 176: 158: 152: 144: 136: 128: 116: 115: 100: 99: 98: 97: 61: 56: 47: 44:2020 September 38: 30: 29: 27: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 520: 507: 505: 500: 495: 494: 489: 486: 483: 480: 476: 473: 471: 467: 463: 460:issues here? 459: 455: 451: 448: 446: 442: 438: 437: 432: 429: 427: 424: 418: 412: 409: 407: 403: 399: 395: 391: 387: 383: 380: 378: 374: 370: 366: 362: 359: 353: 349: 345: 341: 337: 335: 331: 327: 323: 322: 321: 318: 313: 311: 307: 303: 299: 296: 291: 289: 285: 280: 276: 271: 267: 263: 262: 261: 257: 253: 249: 247: 243: 239: 235: 234: 233: 230: 225: 223: 219: 215: 210: 208: 205: 200: 198: 194: 193: 192: 191: 187: 183: 172: 164: 157: 150: 142: 134: 127: 123: 120: 119: 118: 117: 114: 112: 107: 102: 101: 96: 91: 89: 80: 78: 73: 72: 68: 67: 66: 65: 60: 57: 50: 45: 41: 36: 23: 19: 503: 496: 474: 449: 434: 430: 410: 382:Overturn G11 381: 364: 360: 305: 283: 278: 217: 213: 178: 110: 103: 87: 75: 69: 58: 416:Orange Mike 394:advertising 390:promotional 279:demonstrate 275:independent 88:Sandstein 306:temporary 431:Draftify 361:Draftify 218:draftify 20:‎ | 369:Enos733 344:Namerst 340:sandbox 326:Namerst 266:Namerst 252:Namerst 238:Namerst 182:Namerst 171:restore 141:history 82:again. 458:WP:COI 454:WP:TNT 77:WP:G11 462:Hobit 441:talk 163:watch 156:links 52:: --> 16:< 466:talk 422:Talk 402:talk 373:talk 348:talk 330:talk 304:The 256:talk 242:talk 186:talk 149:logs 133:edit 126:talk 32:< 485:ich 482:v!v 436:DGG 392:or 386:G11 363:or 310:DES 288:DES 222:DES 216:or 197:DES 22:Log 479:Le 468:) 443:) 419:| 404:) 375:) 350:) 332:) 258:) 244:) 220:. 188:) 74:– 42:: 464:( 439:( 400:( 371:( 346:( 328:( 284:I 254:( 240:( 184:( 174:) 168:( 166:) 159:| 153:| 145:| 137:| 129:| 124:(

Index

Knowledge:Deletion review
Log
2020 September 26
Deletion review archives
2020 September
2020 September 28
27 September 2020
Rafael Mikhailovich Minasbekyan
WP:G11
Sandstein
08:52, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
deletion review
Rafael Mikhailovich Minasbekyan
talk
edit
history
logs
links
watch
restore
Namerst
talk
11:33, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
DES

DESiegel Contribs
18:05, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
DES

DESiegel Contribs

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.