Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jakov Mrvica


 * 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 no consensus. For biographies, SNGs generally do not matter once WP:GNG is met. And as for that I see an even split of opinions. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:18, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Jakov Mrvica

 * – ( View AfD View log )

While tragic, not enough in-depth coverage about him, outside his death, to show that he meets WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:43, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:25, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:25, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:25, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep I have added Haaretz source with in-depth coverage Shrike (talk) 16:56, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, a soldier, killed during a combat operation, does no make him notable. Huldra (talk) 21:01, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. He is probably not notable, but I wonder if the monument to him is? But there is some peacock wording "This monument gathers numerous admirers of Jakov Mrvica, including tourists". Errrr. Anyway, maybe there's a chance to rewrite this into an article about the monument? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:07, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , interesting. But I couldn't find any in-depth sources in English, perhaps someone who knows Hebrew or Serbian might.  Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 15:19, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * From what the article says, the monument was designed and led by his girlfriend, not a government monument. Jamesallain85 (talk) 16:06, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:BASIC. Mztourist (talk) 10:32, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, the individual and monument have significant coverage.--Geshem Bracha (talk) 14:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:BASIC. Only notable for being killed, limited media coverage, the article even states the monument was designed and led by his girlfriend, not a national effort. I do not see any notable action or achievement, wikipedia is not a memorial website. Jamesallain85 (talk) 16:06, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, significant coverage and he was the subject of a movie--Steamboat2020 (talk) 00:56, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete; even if WP:BASIC has been (arguably) met, it only established presumed notab[ility]. However, the subject fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:VICTIM. Apart from the interesting fact that he decided to join IDF as an (originally) foreign citizen, which apparently sparked increased media coverage, nothing in his biography stands out from the thousands of soldiers killed in action worldwide. No such user (talk) 08:52, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The only thing that matters that he meets WP:GNG and he does. The Haaeretz pretty much extensive Shrike (talk) 10:18, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG: "Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article. A more in-depth discussion might conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article. Much as I admire the efforts of his girlfriend and friends to preserve the memory of him, which apparently successfully brought attention of Israeli media, I still do not think the subject's achievements are worth a biography article. For a comparison, I'm just reading an article about the last working blacksmith in my county, a quirky story which happened to catch the attention of the national TV, and a newspaper several years ago. Extensive coverage about him? Yes, barely. Worthy of an article? Not in my book. No such user (talk) 10:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @No such user: The world isn't a fair place. There are people who do great things with their lives but never receive the coverage that they deserved. Then there are people who have the right connections and receive prestigious awards for things they didn't really deserve. Clearly, if not for his girlfriend he wouldn't have received extensive media coverage nor would he have a monument dedicated to him. However, it isn't our place to determine whether not or a person truly deserved the recognition and significant coverage. The only thing that matters is that he meets WP:GNG and he does.--Steamboat2020 (talk) 19:47, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for you input, but I strongly disagree. We Wikipedians wrote the rules and guidelines in order to support our mission: coverage of encyclopedic knowledge about the world and its history. Those rules are not the God's commandments, but only fuzzy guidelines through this complex mission, and should be used with common sense. Being the encyclopedia editors, it is our place to determine whether or not a person "truly deserved the recognition". GNG is not the only thing that matters, and thus it is called a guideline, and contains disclaimers for a purpose. Should I create an article on my blacksmith now? No such user (talk) 20:47, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @No such user: Sure, why not? Why is your blacksmith different then say somebody like Albert Woolson?--Steamboat2020 (talk) 22:44, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:53, 15 July 2021 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Hopefully the last relist. Please come to consensus in the next 7 days.
 * Keep, has significant coverage. Vici Vidi (talk) 08:35, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dr. Universe (talk) 21:19, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. The sources are good enough, especially 1, 2 and 6. Dr.KBAHT (talk) 22:29, 22 July 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.