Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dmitry Galkovsky (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Passes WP:N for me, at least for his earlier work. (non-admin closure) treelo  radda  19:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Dmitry Galkovsky
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The first AFD of this article ended up in a hopeless trainwreck after a wave of socks and SPAs posted comments; some were blocked, some had their comments struck, but there was no way to distill a consensus. No opinion from me for now. Stifle (talk) 10:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:38, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Appears to pass the notability bar based upon awards received (the Russian Booker Prize) and the fact his works are referenced in at least one professionally published third-party work, New Realism, New Barbarism (available via Google Books here). 23skidoo (talk) 14:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per the arguments at the last afd. Ostap 18:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. He has been published in English (see above comment), and he has been covered in the Russian-language multiple times. See editorial in The View (Vzglyad) ("Дмитрий Галковский: Березовский – между Азефом и Парвусом") and an interview with leading opposition radio station Moscow Echo (Ekho Moskvy) (Radio segment). He is also considered a key figure in contemporary postmodernism in Russia, in the English-language publications, and in a 2007 PhD thesis "From Aleshkovsky to Galkovsky : the praise of folly in Russian prose since the 1960s" (requires OCLC access). There's room for improvement, but this is a good start on a real, notable figure. Cross-translation from the Russian wikipedia could also help this article. Avram (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Galkovsky is notable as a writer short biography by Mikhail Epstein and winner of Anti-Booker literary prize, as a journalist (his political commentary is quoted by (Boris Kagarlitsky), George N. Katsiaficas, Vladimir David Shkolnikov) and as a blogger (his blog is in the top 100 of Russian blogs). His work is treated by Oxford research fellow Oliver Ready in his From Aleshkovsky to Galkovsky: The Praise of Folly in Russian Prose Since the 1960s. Oliver Ready, Wolfson College, University of Oxford, Faculty of Medieval and Modern Languages and Literature, Division of Humanities. 2007. DonaldDuck (talk) 01:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, but cleanup is required. This is an article on a living person and yet is quite extensive despite a significant dearth of reliable sources.  That said, he does seem important enough to merit an article, thanks to the critical analysis of his work and this Antibooker prize.  Mango juice talk 16:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Galkovsky was notable as an important and controversial author, long before he became a scandal-mongering journalist and a navel-gazing blogger. Here is a result of a Google book search that yields, inter alia, significant references such as a treatment in a comprehensive compendium of contemporary Russian literature by Sergei Chuprinin; a "metaphysical" analysis by well-known literary scholar Mikhail Epstein; another exegetical treatment by first-rate critic Aleksandr Genis; a political reference by famous historian Roy Medvedev; another political reference by prominent socialist thinker Boris Kagarlitsky; an extended treatment in a Dictionary of XXth Century Culture by Vadim Rudnev; and an entry of the title of Galkovsky's magnum opus in the definitive Dictionary of Quotations from Russian Literature by Konstantin Dushenko. Larvatus (talk) 08:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)larvatus


 * 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.