Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Presidents of Northern Cyprus


 * 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   speedy keep. Spartaz Humbug! 16:27, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

List of Presidents of Northern Cyprus

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Lack of notability since these "Presidents" are only recognised by the Republic of Turkey and the "TRNC". Lack of independent citations that recognise these "Presidents". Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 11:23, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because [they have no independent citations/references outside of the sphere of self-interest of the Republic of Turkey and its "TRNC" annexe] as such these subjects are not notable on English Wikipedia:

Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 15:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge into President of Northern Cyprus, purely on the grounds that the list is too small to be useful: there are only three of them; their list can much more efficiently be presented in the parent article. Other than that, troutslap the nominator for a clearly frivolous nomination. The notability argument is obvious bogus – of course these figures and the institution they represent are notable, quite possible just because they are so contentious (i.e. non-recognized). Nipson has simply been on a POV rampage to eradicate as much of our coverage of the political institutions of the TRNC as he can, for transparently tendentious reasons. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:22, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: Nipson is now trying to bundle four more articles into this discussion, for the same obviously tendentious reasons. I would strongly recommend unbundling these, if Nipson insists on the nominations. The three presidents, Eroglu, Talat and Denktas (!), are so obviously notable that they will be immediate WP:SNOW keeps (I recommend speedy). The one about President of Northern Cyprus might be debateable, but since the two articles may very likely end up with different outcomes, it is far preferable to have separate debates for them. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:23, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: They are "Presidents" of the "TRNC". They all have exactly the same issue. There are no worthwhile citations confirming their notability outside of the sphere of influence of the Republic of Turkey and its annexe (the "TRNC"). Nipsonanomhmata (talk) 15:26, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Please don't post repeated bolded "delete" votes. You are already the nominator, your opinion is stated right at the top. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:31, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:44, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:44, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:44, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The criterion for inclusion in Wikipedia is notability, not 'recognition'. Regardless of the legality or otherwise of the government of Northern Cyprus, it clearly exists, and as such a 'President' is significant. Wikipedia is not the UN, nor an international court of law, and should describe reality as reported in reliable sources, rather than basing articles on what 'ought' to be the case AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I would suggest that the inclusion of other articles in this AfD is a breach of procedure, as each article should be discussed on its own merits, in its own AfD. On this basis, any !votes for the included articles should be considered as invalid. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong keep all 5 Whether the status of the republic is disputed or not, they have de facto control over a large territory. Its head of state is the president. Therefore all articles (good to do this in one go!) merit inclusion. All articles start explaining the republic is only accepted as such by Turkey to avoid suggestion that this is a widely recognized state. I do agree however (on editorial grounds only) that since the republic had only 3 presidents a merge between the president list and the president article would be beneficial... L.tak (talk) 15:56, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong speedy snow keep. Ridiculously POINTy. I also support procedually separating List of Presidents of Northern Cyprus from this AfD.--SGCM (talk)  16:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep all. The nominator is either confusing wikipedia's concept notability with legal status, or is pushing a POV. Whichever applies, there's no reason to delete. It might be better to merge the list into its parent article, but that's an editorial decision which does not need to be discussed at AFD. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:05, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Absolutely. It's a legitimate list ~ no matter an individual's political position on the legitimacy of the office. Recognition by us, or others, is not relevant - merely it's notability. And I'll suggest that the internationally reported divisiveness over its legitimacy is itself sufficient support for its notability. Deletion would simply be political censorship brought about by gaming the system, its notability - and verifiable supporting ref's - are undeniable. We can, and eagerly do list appearances made by unknowns on low-rated cable tv sc-fi serials. We should, and must if we are to stay true to our mission, list internal leadership of large swaths of disputed territories. .99.141.243.84 (talk) 16:08, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep all. Top-level political leaders in political entities without international recognition are still notable. Sam Blacketer (talk) 16:18, 15 January 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.