Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ilya Masodov


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn for reasoning given by. Suitability of article to be re-considered when Wikipedia has better access to sources in the .ru domain (which cannot currently be done due to current events). (non-admin closure) Singularity42 (talk) 23:24, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Ilya Masodov

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This is an article about a person who may or may not exist (which the article upfront about). All sources cited appear to be blogs. There may be more reliable non-English sources out there, but at the moment I'm not seeing it. Seems to fail WP:GNG, WP:AUTHOR. Singularity42 (talk) 13:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Singularity42 (talk) 13:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Singularity42 (talk) 13:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * (from the article creator): I paid attention to this way "Find sources: "Ilya Masodov" – news" After that, Google suggested me some distinguished and reliable sources in Russian which not appear to be blog. Most definetely. So I changed my sources to more reliable.''' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Litvinchechka (talk • contribs) 14:15, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Comment - the equivalent Russian article is quite substantial with more references. My Russian is not good but I'll look further. The apparent problem here may be more to do with the creator's English skills. Ingratis (talk) 04:33, 2 February 2022 (UTC)


 * (from the article creator): I admit that, my English isn't great. Speaking of the article and the Russian one in particular. If you research the sources the Russion one you can see I used other resources which aren't used in Russian version. So esentially it's not total translation even though I use the main poins from there to be sure.


 * Thank you for clarifying. I'm very sorry for my clumsy phrasing. All I was thinking of was that it's a bit daunting to translate a long article into another language in which one isn't fluent, but (not for the first time) I missed the point. Ingratis (talk) 14:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)


 * (from the article creator): Is there any way to improve the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Litvinchechka (talk • contribs) 14:58, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 16:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. Inability to identify the real name of an author is no bar to notability, if they've been discussed in WP:RS. Compare the 18th century British pampleteer Junius (writer), who has never been identified; there's even a standalone article, Identity of Junius, on the problem. Narky Blert (alt) (talk) 15:16, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * (from the article creator): Well, with regard to inability to identify the real name of an author, we can only rely on Dmitry Volchek's words. He states and insists on Ilya Masodov is a real person. So now I guess the main question if we can trust to Dmitry Volchek's words. He's quite distinguished journalist and the editor-in-chief of Radio Free Europe in Russia. https://www.svoboda.org/contact (Дмитрий Волчек	Главный редактор сайта Русской службы)
 * Comment. To clarify, my AfD nomination is not based on the existence versus non-existence of a person by this name.  We have articles on other artists who cannot be named (see Banksy as an obvious example).  The fact of the lack of provable identify could be notable.  Or the artist could be notable for their work.  Or both.  I was just unable to identify reliable sources to support the notability.  As a non-Russian speaker, I had concern about the Gorky media references, as they appear to be blogs with little editorial oversight.  There's one or two other references that I can't tell if they are reliable sources or not.  I'm not withdrawing the AfD yet, but would be interested to see if other experienced Russian editors can chime in. Singularity42 (talk) 21:15, 9 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment In fact, in Russian Wikipedia, there are no more references than in this version, but many respected and famous people who take their place in Russian Wikipedia speak about the character of the article.Faskat (talk) 08:01, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Faskat

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC) Relisting comment: more discussion would be helpful. Wonder if we could find some bilingual contributors to expand on the sourcing. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  01:22, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep The sources are good enough. The genre is rather underground. That's why not many publishers dare editing his works. Dr.KBAHT (talk) 21:42, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment I would ask to withdraw the nomination for the time being. I don't think the nomination was in any way faulty but at the time of the nomination there was no way to predict that searching for Russian sources would become almost impossible. I can see indexes that indicate there might be content about this author in .ru domains but for obvious reasons getting to those resources is, well, spotty. There's really no harm to the project in leaving this article in main space for now.  Eggishorn  (talk) (contrib) 23:02, 2 March 2022 (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.