Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ioan Popa (romanian writer)


 * 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   delete. Single "keep" opinion does not address the primary issue of notability. Owen&times; &#9742;  12:41, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Ioan Popa (romanian writer)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The subject lacks coverage in multiple published secondary sources. Moreover, I can find no evidence that any of the WP:AUTHOR or WP:PROF criteria are met. From the five links provided, Popa (and beware, there are many Ioan Popas running around) is mentioned in just two. This one is a sale page for his books, and obviously not a reliable (or quotable) source. This one is the Tismăneanu Report, and while it's interesting that one of his works is cited in one footnote of the report's 666 pages, that doesn't imply significant coverage of Popa.

Furthermore, I should note that while there's no reason to believe any of this article's claims, given that they're unsourced, I would note that they don't always show notability in any case. For instance, he's allegedly a member of the Writers' Union, but it has previously been noted that membership is no big deal, and no substantive factor toward a writer's notability. - Biruitorul Talk 21:16, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This article was made based from the Romanian Wikipedia version: . Although I will point out that the references/sources used seem to be the same.Calaka (talk) 02:43, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete At first glance, I had this guy pegged for another Popa (from Transylvania), who is somewhat notable. (Mind you, his name, surname and the combination of both may be shared with some hundreds of thousands of Romanians.) For now, this is an aufully written piece of (self-)promotion, and the few bites of it that are verifiable are also irrelevant. Coverage in multiple independent sources? Not asserted so far. Dahn (talk) 14:16, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Completed the translation of the article from romanian to english. I've added the bibliography that was used to build this article and recomendations from some well known people. I hope the last modifications bring more light into this article and also that it will be excluded from deletion. Valy3D 23:10, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Completed some minor grammar modifications for a more accurate translation. Having the full bibliography used to build this article, the citation of sources, books published and Critical Appreciations added to the article I think it's safe to say that this article should be removed from the Articles for deletion list. Valy3D 12:50, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I've done some modifications on the translations of the book titles and some other minor adjustments in the article. I hope that there are no more problems with the article. Also I see that lately nobody but me commented about this article so unless someone finds other thins wrong with this article I will remove the deletion header. Valy3D 09:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It has to go through the seven-day process before the deletion header can be removed.  Lugnuts  (talk) 09:52, 10 May 2011 (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.