Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lake Van Monster


 * 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 keep. Sam Walton (talk) 17:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Lake Van Monster

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The topic is based solely on newspaper gossip and reads like a tourist advertisement for Van Province. Note: Tried to fix the article before realizing I was essentially fixing an advertisement. --92slim (talk) 13:53, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * So you mean you are not instead patrolling anything related to a certain ethnicity, interesting... --176.239.33.146 (talk) 07:16, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No. That's nonsense. I am wary of anonymous IP's though. --92slim (talk) 10:35, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * IPs are transparent, traceable, u are anonymous and have certain enmity that you are not able to hide. Learn to pretend like some other folks do. --176.239.33.146 (talk) 12:03, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete I already know it's an unimportant article, traceable IP and possible sockpuppet of User:Tiptoethrutheminefield. --92slim (talk) 17:39, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Sockpuppet investigation link here, for the interested. --92slim (talk) 14:47, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - insufficient evidence of notability.--Rpclod (talk) 05:31, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I found some sources for you. --176.239.33.146 (talk) 12:05, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The above IP is a suspected sockpuppet. See here. --92slim (talk) 14:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. I have a feeling that this might have regional notability (e.g. see CNN story), but I can only read English. I have placed a notice in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Turkey. Milliyet also appears to be a reliable source, but is there enough to meet our notability standards? I don't know. - Location (talk) 13:35, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Of course this is a gossip. But even gossips may be notable. See Loch Ness Monster and Martians. While nobody believed its existence, this monster has always been in the news and there were many articles on it. It is notable. (And one thing more, Lake Van area is not a potential touristic area and it is hard to explain the monster as a touristic blah.) Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 14:55, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * It is not notable outside of Turkey, unlike the Loch Ness Monster, and as such the deletion is warranted. The creature first appeared in a news article; come on. --92slim (talk) 19:36, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Claiming it has local notability is not a valid reason for deletion. If a thing is notable, then it is notable. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not the point, it's the fact that it originated from a gossipy newspaper article. --92slim (talk) 20:30, 2 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete - Article fails WP:GNG. The 4th and 5th sources lack significant coverage, merely a listing and a mention. The third source is mostly an interview with the author of the first source. Multiple coverage by the same person does not increase notability. Both news columns are essentially blogs with no actual research and are not reliable sources. --Steverci (talk) 17:33, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi : Actually, articles cannot fail GNG, although topics can. As per WP:NRVE, topic notability is based upon available sources, rather than the state of sourcing in articles. North America1000 00:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep While it obviously does not exist as a living creature, it exists as news reports in a wide range of media, from print to TV documentaries, including those that are in reliable sources that are independent of the subject (so the GNG argument expressed above fails). And it exists in visual forms as statues and a strip-cartoon character. A more detailed examination of local media might throw up some sources for this. There was also a Japanese documentary made about it. The proposer's allegation that the article reads like a tourist advertisement is a reason to improve it, not to delete it. Maybe some source places its appearance into its social context (rapidly rising water levels of the lake, economic depression, societal stress due to a change from a rural to urban economy, conflicts between the PKK and Turkish forces, etc.). It is notable enough to have several statues depicting it: including a new bronze one in Van city which has some artistic merit (a rare thing for statues in Turkey), and an older and very bizarre concrete one in Gevash that looks like a dinosaur. Again, a more detailed examination of local media might lead to sources for these. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 18:54, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * So The Daily Mail UK type gossip warrants articles for touristic purposes? Sorry, not buying that. --92slim (talk) 19:39, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The 1990s appearance of the Lake monster is mentioned on p47 in Professor James Russell's "Van and the Persistence of Memory" in "Armenian Van/Vaspurakan", ed. Richard G. Hovannisian, published in 2000. There is enough content in Russell's article to expand the current scope of the Wikipedia article beyond the mere 1990s supposed monster into the long-standing folk belief of monsters dwelling in Lake Van. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 02:20, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I have added some content from this source into the article. There is still more to add. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 02:58, 3 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Question What does Delete I already know it's an unimportant article mean, User:92slim? Have you not been to the teahouse yet? This is lack of respect to other people. --141.196.205.35 (talk) 22:10, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Nice try. Maybe you should stop sockpuppeting for a change. Investigation link here. --92slim (talk) 14:47, 3 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep It doesn't seem very important, a lake monster from the Turkish hinterlands (Van Province is literally at the back end of Turkey.) But it does have sources and more could probably be found.-- Auric    talk  00:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Having souces doesn't satisfy notability, because the article is based on a newspaper gossip article from 1889. The video is unverified and the "Armenian vishap" story is not even remotely related. --92slim (talk) 00:31, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Having sources DOES satisfy notability. "Notability" does not mean "something a Wikipedia editor thinks is important". So, 92slim, notability is unconnected to what you personally think is important or unimportant. The subject is mentioned in newspaper sources and it is mentioned in an academic source. The existence of that last source alone nullifies all arguments to delete. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting non-argument. Read Notability before writing nonsensical things. --92slim (talk) 17:22, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 23:36, 8 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep – Meets WP:GNG. Source examples:, , , (short article) ,  (short article) . North America1000 00:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per the sources found by Northamerica1000 which show that the article meets the main notability guideline. Davewild (talk) 10:45, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable sources over many years demonstrate its notability wrt WP:GNG. It's been covered outside Turkey by, a print Japanese magazine whose crew included adventure writer Hideyuki  &, been subject of a USA TV "documentary" , has been written on by James Russell, the professor at Harvard  etc; the story of the 1889 "sighting" featured in British (Reynolds's Newspaper, London) & USA newspapers , , and it's featured briefly in multiple English-language books like  and . Within Turkey, it's been subject of a book  that Worldcat shows  is published by a university press - YYU, as well as in various press sources, and used as the subject of a theatrically released film  & . –146.199.151.33 (talk) 13:41, 16 May 2015 (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.