Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lviv in Polish


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:43, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Lviv in Polish

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

there is no mention or proof in the article that any of the books meet the criteria WP:NBOOK nothing found on a web search. Domdeparis (talk) 11:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep. The books in the series seem to have several reviews. One in minor but seemingly peer review acacemic journal, one or two in regional newspaper of Polish minority in Ukraine, pl:Kurier Galicyjski , two at least in Polish portal on the Polish East, pl:kresy.pl ([http://www.kresy.pl/publicystyka,wydarzenia-tygodnia?zobacz/ukrainki-ratuja-polska-spuscizne-lwowa-czyli-nie-jest-tak-zle-w-naszym-lwowie-szanowni-sasiedzi), one in Polish portal on history, pl:Historia.org.pl . There are few more sources like this. They are all niche sources, but taken together I think they give the series borderline notability, and this time I'll lean on the keep side. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  10:19, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment All the links are in Polish I was wondering if you had found a translation of the books themselves into English. If not I was wondering what the justification for having a page in English as there seems to be no crossing of the language barrier either in terms of the subject itself or the coverage? just so I'm clear if a Polish book or series of books do not exist in another language they are useless to a non Polish speaking person and in consequence any Wikipedia page in English seem to be just as useless unless there is sufficient coverage in English to make them notable which seems not to be the case. Domdeparis (talk) 09:44, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Clearly, you are new around here, and so misunderstand two crucial facts: notability is not language dependent, and non-English sources are totally valid. A book (or anything else for that matter) only has to be notable to be encyclopedic, which language it was written in, and what language are the sources for the article, does not matter at all. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:33, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi not that new and I do fully understand that notability is not language dependant, my question is that if the books only exist in Polish and have not been translated into English or any other and have no coverage in any other language what is the point of a page in English? This is a specific question concerning books that have not been translated out of their original language.  There seems to be no claim of notability in the article. Domdeparis (talk) 11:30, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * You are wrong - the books were written in Ukrainian, the Polish version is a translation.Xx236 (talk) 07:36, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok same thing logic though, if they are only in Ukranian and Polish etc etc and there are no sources in English and they not translated into English what is the point of a page in English? Domdeparis (talk) 09:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The series describes a cultural phenomena of so called ghost signage. That subject of study attracted scientific attention since 1980-ties. The series geographically cover the area of Lviv and nearby territories which are the “blank space” in the minds of the majority of Europeans. While scientifically Lviv ghost sign heritage is the unique part of the world cultural heritage. That is because the signs were mostly made in the languages such as Polish and Yiddish. They are not the languages of the modern city population. I hope that in Wikipedia Lviv ghost signs of Ukraine are not less important than the signs of the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Canada. I plan to expand the article to show that Lviv signage is an integral part of ghost sign heritage of the world. Speaking of the scientific notability the first volume is mentioned in English book Advertising and Public Memory: Social, Cultural and Historical Perspectives on Ghost Signs by Stefan Schutt, Sam Roberts and Leanne White. The series are recommended for summer practice studies for students of Polish philology, Slavonic philology, History and Culture studies departments in National Ivan Franko University of Lviv as well. Through the soviet times the signage of Polish, Jewish and Ukrainian communities was pained off and destroyed. No scientific research was allowed to pass through the “Iron curtain”. Does English Wikipedia still wish to be like that?Янця Гонак 16 December 2016 —Preceding undated comment added 18:48, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:22, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:23, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:23, 19 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep I added the suggested references from @Piotrus above. I put in one or two I found. With addition of the extra references the article now meets WP:NBOOK and should be kept. Pauciloquence (talk) 05:42, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:35, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:35, 25 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Piotr has provided adequate references. A subject that is notable in one language is notable in any language. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 22:25, 25 December 2016 (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.