Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laszlo Forizs


 * 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. Waltontalk 17:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Laszlo Forizs

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Seems to be a vanity- but anyways a nonnotable biography. Was prodded, but author removed, with comment
 * Deleting this article reminds me to the case of C. F. Gauss. When a work on P.D.E. by Jacobi was shown to him he said it was not notable enough. A note came: greater garbage had been published by G.

Main author is Vikankata, whose only contributions are to this article, plus spammed links to Forizs's homepage at various film articles (Special:Contributions/Vikankata). Staecker 12:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC) To KissL and David:
 * Weak Delete. He seems to be mexican. Possibly fails WP:BIO.--Edtropolis 13:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.   -- David Eppstein 16:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete -- does not seem remarkable for a scholar still in the early stages of the career (i.e., the point where the stage of the career itself is not remarkable). Interesting that the important publications are in a completely different field than the Ph.D. -- must be really smart and interesting person, but should not now the subject of a WP article.  -- Myke Cuthbert (talk)
 * Think it over -- No one of the explicitely mentioned 15 reasons for deletion are satisfied. Staecker's note: "Main author is User:Vikankata, whose only contributions are to this article" is irrelevant. Myke's note is quite interesting. What makes his note relevant here is the special situation in Hungary before the changes in 1989. If you have a look at the biography, it started in Pannonhalma, at a Benedictine school. From such a school no humanities or even no career as an educator was possible. In fact it was prohibited. It's not an accident that Mr Forizs got a degree as an educator some twenty years after finishing his first university as a physicist. He had no other choice if he wanted to become a researcher. (Vikankata's friend)
 * The works list is impressive, but taking three of the books with ISBN numbers, I couldn't find them in any major library catalog (tried: LOC, Harvard, Abebooks, WorldCat), so without a prose discussion of the author or reliable sources of the books' importance, I stand by my opinion. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 17:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply to Myke -- It is a bit unfair to try to check it only in these catalogs. It's a shame but you won't find too much in these libraries from our greatest writers, poets or composers, and they are still worth for a WP article. If you really want to check the reliability of the information given on Mr Forizs why not try a local database first? E.g. http://www.oszk.hu/index_en.htm or MOKKA http://helka.iif.hu:8088/corvina/opac/wpac.cgi and type Fórizs László to the first line or try http://www.eduport.hu/kozelkat/ and choose any particular library, e.g. the first one, a public library (Fővárosi Szabó Ervin Könyvtár) katalógusa or the library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Könyvtára) or if it is difficult because of the language barrier go directly to the database of the library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences http://prol.mtak.hu/F?RN=400027349 and type the required name. Or get the records directly: Vikankata
 * Comment., who signs him or herself "Vikankata's friend" in the comment above, has the same editing pattern as : edits only to this article or to spam links to it elsewhere. The reply to Myke, which reads as if written by the same person, was by Vikankata himself or herself. —David Eppstein 19:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC) PS. Also added many of the the same spammy links earlier. —David Eppstein 19:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment We are working together. But this was again an irrelevant note. Try this link instead: http://odr.lib.klte.hu/corvina/odr/wpac.cgi and check the books if you really want to. In any case, the decision is yours. We do not want to argue any more. We checked Sándor Weöres and Jenő Dsida two of our really important poets and found only one of them. So it is almost the same whether Laszlo Forizs got a page or not. Good bye. Vikankata
 * Delete It is very hard to evaluate this work, and I do not think we should delete until some of those people at this WP who know the language can be heard from. Though not listed on the page, this article seems a translation of the page on the Hungarian WP . I did figure out how to use the Hungarian online catalog, and it seems that only the "Creation Hymns of the Rigveda (Rigvéda – Teremtéshimnuszok) (1995) (In Hungarian) ISBN 963-85349-1-5 is possibly an original book. Everything else is either his PhD thesis, conference presentations or translations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)
 * Keep I am not sure whether I can suggest you to keep an article, but consider this "Dhammapada - Path of Virtue (Az erény útja)" (2002) ISBN 963-20227-3-4 (In Hungarian) is referred in the Magyar Nagylexikon, Academic Press, Budapest, Vol. 4, p. 720 under the lexikon entry Buddhism; "Creation Hymns of the Rigveda (Rigvéda – Teremtéshimnuszok)" (1995) (In Hungarian) ISBN 963-85349-1-5 is referred to in Magyar Nagylexikon, MNK, Budapest, Vol. 15, p. 499 under Rig-véda. University courses based on his work (not at all complete, based on the availability on the net): Dr. Tibor Porció: Dhammapada, Religious studies, Attila József University, Szeged, (http://www.vallastudomany.hu/Members/porcio/szovegolvasas), Rigvéda - Teremtéshimnuszok by Prof. Ágnes Birtalan: Mitológia, sámánizmus és népvallás, Roland Eötvös University, Department of Inner Asian Studies (http://www.btk.elte.hu/innerasia/Irodalom2.pdf), Dr. Imre Garaczi: History of Philosophy (Filozófiatörténet), Course code: TT1312F (http://www.vein.hu/public_stuff/oik/tematikak/tematikak/2004-05-2/TT1312F3.html) both books are used as primary source by Dr. Ferenc Ruzsa: Oriental Philosophy (Keleti filozófia) (India), ELTE BTK Institute of Philosophy, Course code: FLN-300.11 (http://philosophy.elte.hu/institute/course/syllabus/200401/komplett_kredit_syllabus_200401.pdf) (http://phil.elte.hu/institute/course/200401/kredites_filo_200401.RTF) (Librarian) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.199.218.182 (talk • contribs) — 195.199.218.182 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletions.   -- David Eppstein 16:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - it is a vanity article. There are thousands of people in the world who led a university faculty for a few years and translated books. Zello 16:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Question Dear ZELLO what do you think about Juan Mascaro? (WP: Juan Mascaró (December 8, 1897 – March 19, 1987) was a translator born in Majorca (an island of Spain) to a farming family) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.226.223.137 (talk • contribs)
 * I'm not Zello, but see: WP:WAX. —David Eppstein 05:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, David. I am afraid, it is a deeper problem, I mean the selection principles. You mentioned somewhere that the deletion of Forizs was not intentional, but only an editorial mistake. No, it was intentional. I deleted it. Then the robot reconstructed the article. And I started to think it over. You know Hungary is so terribly misrepresented in WP that it is more than a shame. I am 100 percent sure that it is not Laszlo Forizs whose entry is so badly needed in this encyclopedia, yet I am more and more convinced that he is eligible and worth being there. I am waiting for your decision. Vikankata
 * Strong Keep Forizs had not only been the chair of the Department of Buddhist studies (shared with Lodoe Lobsang Sonam, a well known Tibetan monk and scholar from Dharamsala, the personal envoy of His Holiness), but he was one of the few guys who made the Institute (literally, out of nothing). He was there from the very beginning. It started as an underground group of young Hungarians interested in oriental languages and Buddhism, and now it is a well established Buddhist Institute, The Gate of Dharma Buddhist College. His contribution to the laying down of the foundations of this unique Institute is unquestionable. He actively participated not only in determining the whole curriculum, but also in the long and difficult process of the accreditation of the Gate of Dharma College by the Accreditation Committee of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. The institute is now fully integrated into the Hungarian System of Universities and Colleges. After getting the full accreditation Mr Forizs left the committee and a bit later left the Institute. Now he is again a school teacher. (a Hungarian buddhist) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.199.218.182 (talk • contribs)
 * This is not a vote, but you are only allowed to express one boldface keep/delete opinion. This is the third opinion from what to me looks very likely the same person. —David Eppstein 15:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The sockpuppetry above is convincing me that this is indeed a vanity page. And I'm not seeing the reliable secondary sources (such as reviews or citations of his works) that would be needed to pass WP:N. —David Eppstein 15:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Did a Google search in Hungarian, but cannot find any secondary sources about this guy. KissL 15:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC) Changed my mind to a Weak Keep per the arguments below. KissL 07:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Once again on lacking secondary sources

Ruzsa Ferenc: Purusha és Ymir. Az összehasonlító mitológia kísérleti ellenőrzése. In Keréknyomok, Orientalisztikai és buddhológiai folyóirat, 2006/1. (Fórizs László: Rigvéda - teremtéshimnuszok, FLI, 1995)

Attila Almási (Vienna University): The Buddhist Intermediate state in Religion in a Changing World (International Conference, Szeged IP 2006) (http://www.reuropa.org/ip2006/programme/the-buddhist-intermediate-state/preview_popup/file)

D'INTINO, Silvia Perdre au jeu. Généalogie d'une allégorie védique in Journal Asiatique, Volume 293, issue 1, 2005

Magyar Filozófiai Szemle - 2002. 1-2.: http://epa.oszk.hu/00100/00186/00011/7simonfi0212.html

CSIKÓS, ELLA. A KREATIVITÁS MINT LEHETÕSÉG. Whitehead metafizikájának egyik alapfogalmáról Whitehead: Folyamat és valóság (a továbbbiakban: PR), 3., 5. és 7. magyarázat kategória. Typotex Kiadó, Budapest 2001, 38. o. (http://epa.oszk.hu/00100/00186/00010/3csikos014.html)

Dhammapada. A Tan ösvénye. Páli nyelvből fordította Vekerdi József, Terebess, Bp., 1999 ISBN 963-914-732X (1)

Andrea Jankovich, Concentration - Morality - Wisdom Educational program of a Buddhist Monastery in Myanmar (Koncentráció – moralitás – bölcsesség. –Egy buddhista kolostor képzési programja Myanmarban) in Új Pedagógiai Szemle 1998 december (http://epa.oszk.hu/00000/00035/00022/1998-12-eh-Jankovich-Koncentracio.html)

Lust Iván: RAGASZKODNI ÉS ELENGEDNI, Hasonlóságok és különbségek a pszichoanalitikus és a buddhista magatartásban. In HOLMI, X. évf. 2. szám, 1998.

Fehér Judit: Nágárdzsuna. A mahájána buddhizmus mestere. FLI, Budapest, 1997 (Fórizs L.: Nágárdzsuna filozófiája & Fórizs L. (ford.): Tűzprédikáció, both in India bölcsessége, Budapest, 1994)

Miklóssy Endre: SZABÓ LAJOS, A FUNDAMENTUM  (1902. Budapest – 1967. Düsseldorf) in Magyar Szemle online, Új folyam VII. 6. szám, Budapest, 1998 december (Fórizs: Rigvéda - Teremtéshimnuszok, 1995)

Ruzsa Ferenc: A KLASSZIKUS SZÁNKHJA FILOZÓFIÁJA, FLI, Budapest 1997 (Fórizs: Rigvéda - Teremtéshimnuszok, 1995 & Dhammapada, 1994)

Agócs Tamás: Az éntelenség logikai bizonyítása. Kamalasíla: A Gyémántszútra kommentárja Vadzsraccsédiká-tíká, in Buddhist Logic (Buddhista logika), Történelem és kultúra, Orientalisztikai munkaközösség - Balassi kiadó, pp. 109-124. Bp, 1995 (Fórizs L., A keletkezés egymáson függő láncszemei (Vinaja-pitaka I.1.), in India bölcsessége, Budapest, 1994.

Of course, it's true that there are so many much much more important Hungarians without any WP entry Vikankata


 * I can't read Hungarian, but some of these (e.g. Czikos and Jankovich don't seem to mention Forizs at all, while the only one that's in English (Almasi) contains only a trivial reference to him, a citation in a list of secondary works in Hungarian that's not mentioned within the body of the paper. WP:RS needs more substantial text specifically about him or his work. —David Eppstein 19:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Jankovich refers to his Dhammapada: Az erény útja. 1994, Farkas Lőrinc Imre Kiadó.

Csikos refers to Whitehead's: Folyamat és valóság. Typotex Kiadó, Budapest 2001 (by Forizs-Karsai)

In the case of Almasi, of course, David is right. I can't give him a smoking gun reference. Nevertheless I think KissL's note "but cannot find any secondary sources about this guy" does not apply. Vikankata


 * Comment I'm afraid you got my note wrong, so let me clarify – I did very well see the kind of sources you are listing above, but these are mentioning Fórizs as the translator of some works. By the term "secondary source", I meant a source whose subject is Fórizs (the existence of such secondary sources being the notability criterion set forth in WP:BIO). I still haven't seen any such source, so my above note still applies, with this precision. KissL 08:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Your interpretation of secondary sources is too restrictive, and there are other (deeper) problems here, too. Let us take as an example Forizs's Rigvéda - Teremtéshimnuszok. It has been used in standard university courses all over the country since its publication. The spectrum is wide from Ancient poetry classes to the history of philosophy or ethnography courses all over the country. It is a highly original work, yet it is many times referred to as a translation (e.g. by Dr. Ferenc Ruzsa ELTE, Dr Ágnes Birtalan, ELTE, Dept. of Inner Asian Studies, etc. etc. This is not an accident, it is a tendency. Professor Birtalan is one of the best scholar in Hungary in her field, yet, when Forizs's book is referred to in her bibliography attached to her widely respected course "Mitológia, sámánizmus és népvallás" even the year of publication is wrong.) The fact, that you can still found evidence of the widespread use of Forizs' works in Hungarian universities and colleges from Veszprém to Szeged, from Pécs to Budapest, not to speak about such religious institutions as The Gate of Dharma Buddhist College or The Bhaktivedanta Institute, proves the contrary. In any case, the absence of references in Google or Google Scholar should rarely be used as proof of non-notability. (Wikipedia:Notability (academics), example 3) Vikankata


 * I still prefer to stick to my definition of secondary sources, however accepting the argument that the "translations" in question may indeed be considered original, and thus establish notability, I have changed my recommendation above to a weak keep. KissL 07:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I am still thinking on it. I really do not understand your editing and administrating procedure. David Eppstein is a computer science professor, P. Christopher Staecker is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at Messiah College, Myke Cuthbert is a Visiting Assistant Professor of Music at M.I.T., I do not know who the other guys are. It does not mean they can't have a feeling about the WP entry in question, but it can hardly be an objective assessment. Why don't you ask someone in a field more relevant to Forizs's interest and works? Vikankata


 * Hi Vikankata -- Indeed, you've spotted one of the biggest flaws (real or perceived) in Wikipedia -- that articles by experts are edited, judged, and even deleted by those who aren't experts in that field. Unfortunately not only do few Buddhism experts read AfDs, the number who are also comfortable in Hungarian is likely to be zero.  This general type of problem has chased several expert editors away from the project; I hope we don't lose you in the same way since you seem like a great contributor.  So in order that we have anyone qualified to assess articles for deletion, the community created notability guidelines which help determine when an article is maintainable and when it is likely to attract inaccurate statements.  There's a set of guidelines for professors (called WP:PROF) which people are referring to here to help them decide on Forizs's article.  I can see that you're doing everything you can in good faith to improve the article and forestall deletion--it may be easier if you stuck around and learned what sorts of things articles have which get "Keep" recommendations and what this article is currently lacking.  You may be privy to sources which none of us can find, but aren't sure how to integrate them completely.  If these arise, the article could then be recreated: if it is possible to write an article on Forizs which establishes his notability, then a few months of editing here would show you how to do it.  I am sorry that I can't change my recommendation though.  -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 05:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Myke, thank you for your quick and fair answer, and the extra step you made to reassess the entry. I appreciate your comment and advice. Vikankata


 * To offset our lack of expertise, I've posted brief notices on Wikipedia projects devoted to Hungary and Buddhism about this AfD (not with any bias about whether it should be deleted or not, just a short sentence saying that there's an AfD going on that they may be interested in, per the note about neutrality in the "not a vote" template at the top of this page). I think the Hungary one is where Zello and Kissl come from, so at least we now have a little expertise in that direction. I myself know very little about Buddhism or Hungarian literature, as you say, but I do feel that I have some competence in judging notability of academics more generally, according to the guidelines Myke mentions, and I think participation of people like myself in AfDs of academics across multiple disciplines is a good way of achieving a certain level of consistency in the decisions. —David Eppstein 05:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi David, you are right, and no one questioned your competence in judging notability of academics. My point was that the work of Mr. Forizs belongs to another field, literature and poetry, and translations of philosophical texts, both Western and Eastern. But even from the purely academic perspective (which I think is quite narrow here) if the translation of Whitehead's Process and Reality (a comparable text to Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, I mean in difficulty) is nothing and there are thousands of people out there who do similar works (not to speak about translating from the original Pali or Sanskrit or Vedic sources), then it is difficult to discuss anything. Vikankata

Needs editorial work. expert-subject WikiProject_Council/Directory/Culture/Philosophy_and_religion WikiProject Council/Directory/Culture/Literature 84.0.33.33 12:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Taking into account that so many Hungarians are still missing and Hungary is so badly represented in WP, I think it is better to drop this entry and concentrate on other guys. Vikankata
 * Delete - --Koppany 13:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not appear to meet WP:BIO. —Psychonaut 16:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:PROF Criteria 3 (An academic work may be significant or well known if, for example, it is the basis for a ... course) is satisfied (check Vikankata's data)
 * Keep Agree with Raerek. A lot of courses taught at The Gate of Dharma Buddhist Collage are based on Forizs' works. In addition to this his "Folyamat és valóság" is the standard text in all Whitehead's course, see e.g. Csikós Ella: Roland Eötvös University, Budapest, Whitehead metafizikája, FLN-350.19. Of course, most of the criterias of WP:PROF WP:BIO WP:N, if applied selectively, can be used to drop or keep anybody. There is another point here worth your attention. What is the status of translation, or more importantly translation from rare oriental languages? 193.225.127.130, 13:48 23 June 2007 (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.