Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belarusian nobility


 * 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   redirect to Ruthenian nobility . There does not appear to have been any significant refutation of the nomination statement. Obviously, if reliable sources are brought forward to back the claims made by the "Leave" editor(s), then this may change and therefore I am going to leave the history intact and simply redirect' I will watchlist this. Black Kite (talk) 01:41, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Belarusian nobility

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Most of the content here is unreferenced/OR, and the article cannot even define it's subject, using different names for its topic. If you look at the article, you'll note that the first paragraph speaks of "Ruthenian gentry"; it's only the third paragraph that suddenly introduces, without explanation or justification, the term "Belarusian szlachta" (szlachta=Polish nobility). The term Belarusian nobility (several different English spellings exist for the adjetie Belarusian, the Polish term is "szlachta białoruska") is used by some reliable sources, and the subject is to some extent notable. However, due to the OR/unreferenced content present, I think that the article is essentially a mess beyond salvaging, and thus I have written a new one on the same subject under Ruthenian nobility (a term that IMHO is more correct and more widely used, see for example reliable sources such as, . Further, the term Belarusian can be seen as POVed; I think Ruthenian is more neutral in this context, and it seems more popular in the English language (something like 4x in Google Book hits for the terms). Unless anyone can show me a source that clearly defines Belarusian nobility and distinguishes it from the term Ruthenian nobility, I think this article should be deleted and redirected to the Ruthenian nobility one; the only things to salvage would be the pictures. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  15:15, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Piotrus. --MarchOrDie (talk) 19:20, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Leave/rewrite. Redirect to Ruthenian nobility would not be correct because, i.e., the Radziwill family and many other Baltic families from today's West Belarus is nowadays considered Belarusian but not Ruthenian (although of course there is always a problem with modern nationalisms claiming medieval heritage, however, there is the same problem with the word "Lithuanian" as a name referring to both historical Lithuania and the modern Republic of Lithuania) --Czalex 10:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Would you care to cite any sources for that? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:20, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belarus-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Leave/rewrite. Redirect to Ruthenian nobility would not be correct. Firstly, it would lead to necessity of splitting Ruthenian szlachta from Belarus and Ukraine, because we could hardly unite these two phenomenon under one definition (different, though close, cultures; existence in two different law systems of GDL and Poland; different aspirations in time of modern nationalisms). Secondly, identifying of Ruthianian and Belarusian szlachta would exclude the Belarusian families of Baltic origin. It would be extremely inappropriate taking into consideration the huge role of these non-converted Roman-Catholics in formation of modern Belarusian nation. --Rasa (BLR) (talk) 18:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting, but would you have any sources to support this analysis? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:20, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * LeaveMr Konieczny's argument can be easily defeated by consulting such well written sources as Davis Norman's Vanishing Kingdoms, Timothy Snyder's Reconstruction of Nations, Andrew Wilson's Belarus, the Last Dictatorship. It appears that Mr Konieczny's objections are highly politically motivated and go against the Wiki's ethics of neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.150.4 (talk) 19:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Please keep personal attacks to yourself, and kindly cite pages from the books you list that support your arguments; direct quotations would be nice. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:20, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Leave.
 * Association of the Belarusian Nobility (est. 1988): http://www.nobility.by/
 * Belarusian Nobility DNA Project: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Belarusian_Nobility_DNA/default.aspx?section=yresults — W.V.-S. (talk) 14:51, 20 December 2012 (UTC).
 * So? Two websites notability don't make, and the issue here is even not so much notability as lack of useful, verifiable and reliable content in the article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 00:32, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * O Związku Szlachty Polskiej (http://www.szlachta.org.pl/o-zwiazku-szlachty-polskiej.html) Współpraca: "Związek współpracuje z innymi tego typu organizacjami w kraju i za granicą, w szczególności takimi jak: … Związek Szlachty Białoruskiej" — W.V.-S. (talk) 14:06, 23 December 2012 (UTC).
 * And this relates to this AfD how? An existence of an association dedicated to Martian weed does not make that concept notable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 14:36, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin: I am somewhat concerned about votes from mostly inactive editors; canvassing may be going on. I don't mind it much, alas, the arguments above seem very repetitive, and no discussion is developing. I hope we will remember that AfDs are not just votes. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 00:32, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * I relisted in hope that some experienced regular contributors in this area will comment. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  DGG ( talk ) 22:24, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:10, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect This is one of the few times I use the "per nom" argument, but I can't put it any better than that. § FreeRangeFrog croak 06:26, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Based on the article, it appears to me that Ruthenian nobility are Belarusian nobility, but not vice-versa. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * While that is probably true, the article cites no reliable sources to back this claim. In fact, the article cites no reliable sources on its subject. For that reason I think it must go. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 21:02, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. While I am not an expert, Belarusians are a distinct nation with their distinct language, which is not Polish. I do not see any reason why their nobility (or szlachta) can not be described in a separate article. So, basically, I thought that White Russia and Ruthenia are definitely not the same. But once again, I am not an expert. My very best wishes (talk) 16:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * If you would only read my nomination, you'd see that I don't dispute the notability of this topic - only the fact that this article consists unsalvagable, confusing, and unreferenced mess. There are many notable subjects we don't have article about, but if somebody would just paste is a mess like this, they would not survive long. It's time to let this one go, and if someone would like to rewrite it into a proper article based on reliable sources, they have my blessing. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:40, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw your nomination comments above. However, Ruthenian nobility ≠ Belarussian nobility because Ruthenia≠Belorussia. After quick look at the current version, it does not look like real mess to me. My very best wishes (talk) 23:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, after this AfD is done I intend to remove all unreferenced claims per WP:V. Then I'll remove all off topic content. At that point I believe the article will have nothing but categories. This IS a mess. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:48, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Fine. You obviously know this subject better than me... My very best wishes (talk) 17:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Does it mean you are going to change your vote? --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 16:54, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect per nomination. GiW (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi GiW, I know you edit Belorussian topics - I'd appreciate if you'd expand on why you agree with me (as for now we have had very little meaningful discussion here). --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 16:54, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I am a little late. It is therefore no longer making sense to develop the discussion :) GiW (talk) 15:18, 6 January 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.