Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arkady Babchenko


 * 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. Snowball keep. Stronger consensus within a day than is achieved on most AfDs. Only nom supports deletion. (non-admin closure) &#x2230; Bellezzasolo &#x2721;   Discuss  11:29, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Arkady Babchenko

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Clearly not a notable person and created under fallse premises and other updates. Someone mentioned in MSM is not notable enough as there are many mentions not with WP articles (even authors/academics/journalists). Further if he needs to fake his own death to get publicity that in itself shows how non-notable he is and even then discredits WP for keeping this here. Lihaas (talk) 04:01, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep The circumstances of the article's creation are irrelevant for the present purposes. The claim that he "fake[d] his own death to get publicity" is supported by no evidence and would be immaterial even if it were true. (A successful fraud is still a success; we have a whole list of notable forgers, after all.) Coverage of his work from years past means that WP:BLP1E is inapplicable. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 04:29, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 04:33, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 04:33, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep he's not just someone who has been mentioned in the "mainstream media" he's somebody who has caused/plays a central role in causing a major diplomatic incident between Ukraine and Russia which is ipso facto significant (i.e. even if you disregarded the current tensions between the two countries). Wingwraith (talk) 04:40, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Apparently the staging of his death bothers you, but that does not give you a policy basis for deleting the article. Prior to the revelation that his death was staged, Babchenko was the subject of obituaries in WP:INDEPENDENT WP:RS (e.g., , ) and therefore meets WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Zazpot (talk) 04:42, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, huge media coverage. Mikael Häggström (talk) 04:42, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Lihaas is clearly part of the Russian internet troll army. 207.161.212.123 (talk) 04:45, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Opinions of this aside, this is objectively a major news story and objectively is receiving significant coverage as a diplomatic incident between Russia and Ukraine. Subjective opinions about Babchenko are not grounds for deleting his article.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 04:47, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * comment why then was such a notable person's article created before the "assassination"? WP:NOTNEWS vs. "receiving significant coverage" does not constitute encyclopaedic nature thereof. Which of the alleged RS sources verified what they published?
 * I did clean up the article from POV but it setill is not notable. Lihaas (talk) 04:52, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep, the nomination is ridiculous. The subject passes GNG by a wide margin (dozens of sources already in the article), and, in addition, is notable as a journalist and as a writer (references have been in the article before the nomination).--Ymblanter (talk) 05:38, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * As the talk page discussion demonstrates, the nominator was well aware of the fact that the subject of the article received numerous prizes for his journalist and literary work. I do not think this is a bad-faith nomination, but a trout will be in order.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:39, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Subject is notable by a wide margin even prior to current events, if only for their well received book One Soldier's War that has been published and re-published in multiple languages. Lopifalko (talk) 06:46, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, Clearly Mr. Babchenko is more than "someone who faked their death for attention". Lihaas seems purposefully ignorant on the subject matter, and his motives should be questioned. 94.214.188.129 (talk) 08:40, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment What very strange logic in the nomination. I don't think I've ever seen that before. I can now imagine a new nomination for John Darwin disappearance case. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC) p.s. what exactly is MSM?
 * Keep It's an important moment to illustrate Russian aggressive politics and operations in Ukraine. Definitely needs to be keeped. Goo3 (talk) 10:07, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note that this argument is invalid.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:16, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep But the article is presently badly written, and needs a thorough revision. Thomas Peardew (talk) 11:27, 31 May 2018 (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.