Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aleksandar Berić


 * 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. No arguments for deletion aside from the article's creator. The issue of redirecting, merging, renaming or what have you can continue on the article's talk page. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:27, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Aleksandar Berić

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Procedural nomination. The article was recently blanked by its original creator, who replaced it with the following text: I am a nephew of Alexander Beric. I HAVE CREATED THIS SITE IN WIKIPEDIA - NOT YOU. You have deliberately deleted MY EMAIL ADDRESS I LEFT HERE THAT WAS USEFUL FOR SUCH CONTACTS THAT MAY LEAD TO FIND ANY SURVIVORS FROM THE WARSHIP HE COMMANDED. I WANT TO DELETE A PAGE THAT ANYWAY I HAVE CREATED, NOT YOU. IF YOU CONTINUE DISPLAYING THIS PAGE IT WOULD BE DELIBERATE FROM YOUR SIDE. I HAVE CREATED AND I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO DELETE IT. I DELETE IT PURELY BECAUSE OF A REASON YOU DELETED MY EMAIL ON IT. While I do realize that this does not really constitute a valid deletion rationale under Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines, and that policies like WP:OWN pertain here, I'm submitting a procedural nomination through Wikipedia's proper deletion process strictly as a gesture of good faith after reverting and editprotecting the article back to its prior state. No vote from me, although I will note that both the conflict of interest issue and the article's lack of reliable sources suggest that there may be a more policy-based reason to consider deletion anyway. Bearcat (talk) 21:58, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment I suppose, since it's under full protection, you don't want anyone to add to it? I was going to add references and such to show notability, but that's kinda difficult under full protection. Silver  seren C 22:22, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * My main concern was keeping the original user from blanking the article again. But I've now taken off the page protection and switched it to "revisions require review" instead — if that still poses a problem, then let me know and I'll figure something else out. Bearcat (talk) 22:27, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * As long as I can edit it, that's all I need. Thanks. Silver  seren C 22:33, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I actually can't find anything. It's quite clear that he's an important Serbia war hero, but nothing I found that said that was a reliable source. He seems to be one of those people that the academic writers and historians let slip through the cracks. Silver  seren C 22:58, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Um... G7 anyone? Ham  tech  person  00:39, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not if the original author is not the sole contributor to the article, no. Bearcat (talk) 05:17, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed, there are IP edits that follow the original creation, and there exists no means to tie those edits to the original author. We can disregard tags and maintenance edits - otherwise just tagging the article G7 on someone's behalf would mean it couldn't be deleted G7. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 18:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Leaning toward Keep Bowing to him sets a bad precedent especially when our little disclaimer below the save page button says" If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. All text that you did not write yourself, except brief excerpts, must be available under terms consistent with Wikipedia's Terms of Use before you submit it. " Sadads (talk) 19:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. The reason for deletion is not useful, as the author of the article is free enough to post his e-mail on his own user page, display himself as the original author of that article, or otherwise allow contact through the "email this user" function. He can even state his secondary objectives on the article discussion page, and state that contacting him is a better venue rather than using the article discussion page as the forum for tracking survivors.  In addition, authorship is shown through page history, making claims of exact ownership a moot point.  --Sigma 7 (talk) 22:57, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge or redirect or rename: I don't think the individual meets WP:MILPEOPLE, but the incident seems to be notable. I've asked for some help at WT:OMT in converting this into an article about the battle or the ship... I would prefer to see this renamed to Yugoslav monitor Drava.  bahamut0013  words deeds 13:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Invasion of Yugoslavia, where I have named the subject as commander of the Monitor Drava (with a source, of course). I can find no evidence that the article subject himself is notable, and it looks to me as if the "keep" opinions above are calls to punish the article creator for misunderstanding what Wikipedia is for rather than considered judgements of the subject's notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Captain of a warship is notable. No need to merge or rename. Additionally, I think we should as a matter of policy ignore all requests for deletion based on the failure to have ownership of a p. It's the exact reciprocal of not allowing articles from banned editors.       DGG ( talk ) 03:23, 24 September 2010 (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.