Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrei Marga


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   00:32, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Andrei Marga

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I am Andrei Marga, the person referred to in this biography. I do not want this content about me on Wikipedia at all. Tempeditor (talk) 14:07, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Marga was the minister of education of Romania for at least 3 years, and we have lots of reliable sources. No way he is other than notable. Desire to obscure past political actions one may now regret is not reason we should delete an article. The university rector positions and political party leadership might also make him notable if he had not been minister of education, but being minister of education makes him 100% pass any and all inclusion guidelines. This is a person so important that it would be a travesty to not have an article on him.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:59, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly passes WP:POLITICIAN and WP:GNG. The subject's feelings (if the nominator is indeed the subject) are irrelevant. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:46, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:57, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:57, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:57, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:57, 19 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep (think i feel soft flakes coming down), meets WP:GNG, WP:POLITICIAN and WP:ACADEMIC, well sourced article reflects this. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Clear keep despite subject's views. Xxanthippe (talk) 09:33, 19 September 2016 (UTC).
 * Keep for unambiguously encyclopedic notability. The article could really do with a polish-up, though. I also notified comcom of this AFD. If this is Mr Marga and he has particular actionable issues with the content that he can detail, he should definitely contact info@wikimedia.org with his concerns - David Gerard (talk) 13:38, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wikipedia articles are not kept or deleted based on the subject's desire to not have a Wikipedia article — for a low-profile figure whose includability may be debatable we have some latitude to consider deletion per WP:BIODEL, but there still have to be other reasons why the article might be deletable, and the subject's own wishes don't tie our hands all by themselves. And a higher-profile figure who has a clean pass of an inclusion criterion like WP:NPOL definitely doesn't get veto rights over the existence of an article. This definitely needs to be reviewed for policy compliance — if there are BLP violations then we can definitely remove them and even WP:OVERSIGHT them if they're problematic enough, but precisely because we do have those remedies we can't be forced to delete an article just because there's problematic content in it. Submit to WP:BLPN for review, but keep. Bearcat (talk) 22:15, 19 September 2016 (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.