Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abba Samuel of Dabra Wagag


 * 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. — CharlotteWebb 01:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Abba Samuel of Dabra Wagag
This is almost utter nonsense. Also, the only source is in Latin, so no one can really verify it. Finally, this could be a possible violation of WP:HOAX. Diez2 04:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The source is in French, to start with; and is verifiable by a large number of Wikipedians. WP:FICTION should probably be applied (not literally, of course; hagiographies aren't usually intended as fiction), but Keep; no valid reason to delete.Septentrionalis 04:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

As for the article itself, major cleanup is required, but the article seems likely to be genuine hagiography, not "utter nonsense" or a hoax. All we need to keep this subject is verification that the biographical details and legends match those attributed to a saint by this name, and users above are claiming to have done that already, so hopefully citations will be forthcoming in short order. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 22:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep First of all, as Septentrionalis notes the source is in French, not Latin. Second, there appear to be several articles on this person on JSTOR and there are other sources that can be found on google, though it also appears many people have had this name.  The sources rely on hagiographies...  Some of the text in the article is questionable and the article is terribly written, needs wikified, cleaned and better sources but these are not valid reasons for deletion.  --The Way 04:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Maybe should go to Wikisource and summary here?? Khorshid 10:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Although it needs to be re-written in many places and citations added. I did verify some of the persons mentioned therein, so there are citation possibilities out there. SkierRMH, 12:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: This seems to duplicate Samuel the Confessor. Some kind of merge should be in order. -- Bpmullins | Talk 21:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Samuel the Confessor is 7th century, Egyptian, and son of a priest. Abba Samuel is 14th century, Ethiopian and son of a king. Please explain further. Septentrionalis 21:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Come now, details like that are nothing that the New Chronology can't explain!
 * Keep. Obviously notable Ethiopian saint. The article already has a reference. Uppland 23:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly notable. Also, why do you assume that nobody could have verified it if it were in Latin? There are many Wikipedians who can read Latin. -- Charlene 23:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - clearly notable and an Ethiopian saint with independent verification of existence. I have wikified the article a little to try and make it more standard (headings, links, categories) - having no idea what standard is required (my normal stomping ground is Australian geographic articles!), I've left the text almost exactly as is. Orderinchaos78 04:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethiopia-related deletions.   --  &rArr;  bsnowball  12:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep A notable Ethiopian saint. It simply needs to be cleaned up. He's legendary in the sense that his acts contain implausible feats, but he is a real saint and was a real figure. I don't see how you would think this could be "utter nonsense" or a "hoax." &mdash; ዮም  |  (Yom)  |  Talk  • contribs • Ethiopia 19:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep While I'll admit that I'm basing my opinion on what Yom has to believe (after all, his family comes from Ethiopia & he should know whether St. Abba Samuel existed), this article illustrates a problem that we will encounter more & more on Wikipedia: that there are some subjects whose veracity cannot be established with a Google search or taking a few minutes to consult an encyclopedia or other reference work. If the submitter had suspected this was a hoax, I honestly wish he had first asked at Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Ethiopia; it's an active project, none of us involved in it want bad information in Wikipedia, & he would have gotten an answer in a reasonable amount of time about it -- & saved himself & others all of this work. May I suggest that in the future a check with relevant WikiProjects be made whenever someone suspects a hoax? -- llywrch 22:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 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.