Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adolf Zytogorski


 * 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The result was   nomination withdrawn (per speedy keep criterion 1). Sjakkalle (Check!)  06:29, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Adolf Zytogorski

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. None of the "facts" alleged in the article make for any notability. They say he beat Staunton with a pawn and two move odds. I say, Big deal. Fodder for speedy deletion if any. Pure tripe. Thank you. OGBranniff (talk) 06:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC) Nomination withdrawn per User:Sasata's sources. Thank you. OGBranniff (talk) 19:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep There's a fairly substantial obit of him in British Chess Magazine (1882) that could be used to flesh out this article. Sasata (talk) 22:38, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, an article about him by Tim Harding in ChessCafe ("The double life of Adolphus Zytogorski"), and entry in Gaige's Chess Personalia, Boase's Modern English Biography, and a full article about him by Tomasz Lissowski in Quarterly for Chess History. There's more sources available; some are harder to find because his name has been spelled incorrectly by various authors. Sasata (talk) 13:59, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment. What makes chess players notable? I have to say that even as an inclusionist I am not seeing any sources (checked Google Books and the regular web). Nothing in Polish at least that has been digitized helps to even verify his existence. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. And with that, my friends, it shows the article subject is not even WP:V, verifiable, much less notable. Let's then just speedily delete this guy off the wiki!  Zap, failing WP:V.  Out! OGBranniff (talk) 07:09, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per Sasata. Toccata quarta (talk) 04:50, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per Sasata's sources. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:55, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, per Sasata's new sources. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Nominator switching to keep and withdrawing nomination. OGBranniff (talk) 19:41, 13 March 2013 (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.