Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugene Kobylinsky


 * 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   speedy keep. Per WP:SK, the nominator is a sockpuppet of a blocked user. No one has seconded deletion, so this dicussion is speedily closed. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 00:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Eugene Kobylinsky

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Entire article is original research.


 * I've fixed this nomination with a sub-heading and templates. Stalwart 111  14:55, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 13 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Clearly existed (as a brief search will determine) and played a significant role in a major event in world history. Just because an article is unreferenced does not mean it is original research, as a quick glance at that policy will reveal. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:40, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Completely unreferenced? Yes. Original research? No, not really. The article needs attention, not deletion.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 14, 2013; 13:30 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - nominator is an obvious WP:SOCK of DogsHeadFalls. Stalwart 111  03:33, 15 June 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.