Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivan Balaz Kral


 * 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. W.marsh 22:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Ivan Balaz Kral


Appears non-notable per WP:BIO. The lower half the page used to be in Slovak, and he does have an article on the Slovak Wikipedia, but it looks like neither of these assert his notability as well. For those who swear by Google, the Slovak version of his name (Ivan Baláž Kráľ) gets 10 hits, and the English version gets 7 hits. Searching for Ivan "Areios Pagos" (the organisation he co-founded) gets 39 hits, none of them relevant. Kavadi carrier 02:48, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - if it's good enough for the slovaks, it's good enough for us. Anyway, he published and a co founder of some society. That should amount for some notability~ Feureau 03:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I am now officially founding the Solomon Society for fine art. Can I have an article? -- I sl a y So lo mo n  |  t a l k  07:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom. &mdash;Hanuman Das 00:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete A student with interests, who writes a blog. No assertion of notability and, per nom's thorough ghiting, no evidence of it either. It's all unverified original research too. -- I sl a y So lo mo n  |  t a l k  07:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - it is totally unverified and non-notable. A le_Jrb talk  07:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - NN; looked through Slovak G hits, still appears to be NN there.
 * comment If I officially found the 'Wikipedian foundation for overindulgence in alcoholic beverages', can I get my own page too?SkierRMH 09:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per others. Punkmorten 11:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sounds like a smart guy, though. Maybe we could get him an account. Black-Velvet  14:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I am the author an argue for keeping it. I dispute this assertion. Ivan Balaz Kral is a young Slovak author and you cannot make the relevancy argument based on Google hits. but to convince you that this entry should be kept. Ivan Balaz Kral already published several books as you will see when I finished my entry. He is a university teacher his webiste and here He has his own entry at slovak Wikipedia. As well his citizen name is Ivan Baláž, Kráľ is pseudonym. So hits on this name Ivan Baláž maybe on Google for his person as well.Sure but let consider, regional newspapers in Slovakia do not have their websites sometimes or do not list everything in archive, here I will post bibliographical notes to some interview Mr. Balaz did like in 2000 in Presovsky vecernik Návrat do minulosti (rozhovor o básnickom umení), No. 2470/ 20.4.2000. Here is a link to another article as Mr. Balaz published new book at the website of one the Slovaks largest cities Presov http://www.presov.sk/article.php?i_id_article=1258 Some of his stories and stories about him were published in alternative magazines. This is a pdf of one interview An interview was in Eastern Slovak daily which is in the group of largest mainstream newspaper SME too "Ako básnici prichádzajú o ilúzie (rozhovor o pôvodnej tvorbe a básnickom umení), In: Prešovský denník KORZÁR" According to these cicrcumstances almost none of young publishing authors in postcommunist countries can make it to wikipedia. When you try to search this author on Google you have to use his citizen name Ivan Baláž as he researches as a scholar under this name, so the hits will be more  on the other hand this includes many other Ivan Baláž s of course as that can be a common name. it still lists him on the first entries, he has his entry in wikipedia. I probably cannot make more argument to keep it. I will finish the article and wait the wikipedia s decission. But let me note this, there is almost no way contemporary authors can make it to english language Wikipedia it is only another proof of my theory which I call the "death of freedom on the internet" as this may sound to you unpopular. For countries like mine, Slovakia, there is no way to get attention, even on wikipedia that prides itself as the "free forum". There is almost no entry on Slovak authors here and I will not change it, I even cannot. Decission-makers in your forums are culturally rude. postings like "I am now officially founding the Solomon Society for fine art. Can I have an article?" but "freedom" at least functions at this point - At the end to suppress freedom of small ones. Yeah, google everything, you can google me [] and []. Guess what. It is in Slovak.But thanks anyway. I added references, I was still working on that article. (Branislav.Ondrasik 23:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC))


 * Keep In the spirit of stemming systemic bias I feel this should be kept. If everything in the article is true, he's notable, and the article does appear to be well sourced.  The sources are in Slovak which I cannot read, however the fact that I don't speak Slovak does not, by any means, make the sources incorrect or inappropriate; thats a problem on my part, not the part of the source.  I'll give the benefit of the doubt in this case to the article's creator.  If someone else who speak Slovak comes along and makes the case that the sources aren't what the article's creator purports them to be, then I'll reconsider.  Also, ghits aren't always the best thing to go by, especially when dealing with something or someone from a country without much internet access or presence, or when dealing with certain historical subjects.  The lack of many ghits remains rather unconvincing to me.  --The Way 06:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:V, and even if claims of article were verified, nothing in the article shows substantive claim of encyclopedic notability - would fail WP:PROF/WP:BIO. I'm sympathetic to WP:BIAS, but there needs to be at least a solid claim of encyclopedic notability (not just this is "a contemporary author/poet/academic who wrote some books/poems/research"). Bwithh 07:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Why is not Slovak wikipedia proof of encyclopedic notability? Btw, I am not the author of Slovak Wikipedia entry about this person... Probably someone, reader of this author.... do not know.... (Branislav.Ondrasik 12:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC))


 * Doubtful Delete There is indeed massive systemic bias in Wikipedia, but giving authors the benefit of the doubt is hardly the right way to deal with it. By analogy, scientific papers don't get accepted for publication just because the journal's editor cannot find a referee with the relevant competencies. This nomination however pinpoints quite an important issue for Wikipedia, particularly for its English instance, which has an obvious transcultural dimension. An appropriate specific guideline may be useful. To me WP:V suggests deletion in this case, but Feureau and The Way's arguments are not without merit. Stammer 09:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm just assuming the good faith of the article's creator insofar as I trust that the Slovak language articles are valid and closely related to the topic. If we refuse to accept foreign language articles as valid sources for the establishment of notability we're going to naturally end up with more systemic bias; many topics, especially historical ones, tend to have few sources in English.  For example, I took a course on the history of Kievan Rus and while we had a few books covering the subject, the vast majority of sources related to that topic are only written in Russian and have only recently begun being translated into English.  If we aren't going to accept these sources then we're going to miss out on a lot of good and valid information.  I will, however, admit that it would be quite nice if we could find someone who spoke Slovak and who was not connected to this article in order to get their opinion on the sources.  --The Way 21:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Making acceptance in one Wikipedia instance a sufficient condition for overall acceptance would enable weakest-link posting strategies and basically sink Wikipedia as we know it. I fully agree with you on the use of authoritative foreign language sources, but I do not think that this is the issue here. I would replace your "quite nice" with "essential" and add that more than one voice would be needed. Stammer 07:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Hi everyone...so I will not influence the decission anymore, but after you shut down this article, please visit this discussion for my last interesting comment with links etc. to make my claim on wikipedia. I understand your fears, that is clear but... you will see. Anyway, I am glad the discussion went more to substance than in the beginning....I have already given up hope this entry will stay (Branislav.Ondrasik 12:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC))


 * Delete per nom. Does not seem to meet WP:BIO for either his writing or academic contributions.   Markovich292  21:58, 17 November 2006 (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.