Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mîralay Seîd Simbélreş


 * 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. No prejudice against recreation if the V/N/RS holy trinity can be satisfied. The Bushranger One ping only 16:45, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Mîralay Seîd Simbélreş


This person is not notable. I couldn find no source to establish his notability. Moreover, this article was created by the method of copy and paste from the article Veysel Özgür. Many datum belongs to him. Takabeg (talk) 13:44, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete A10—duplicate article (I already tagged the article) C h r o m a Nebula   (talk)   14:59, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't think it's a duplicate - it's meant to be about a different person, and has been copied but not fully changed, so I've declined the speedy. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:26, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not duplicate, this article is fake. Takabeg (talk) 21:30, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:08, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. Unfortunately the only source is in Turkish, so most of us can't verify if he existed. But if he did, then as a general officer the article should be kept under WP:SOLDIER and WP:COMMONSENSE. Anyone able to verify his existence? -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I note that the Turkish Wikipedia article is undergoing a deletion discussion where several editors, including our nominator, have cast doubt on the authenticity of the article, being unable to find any reliable sources for his existence. The German article has two further claimed book sources, but there doesn't appear to have been any discussion as to their authenticy either on the talk page or in a deletion discussion. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've controlled two sources that the user added to the article de:Miralay Seid Simbélreş in German Wikipedia. Both sources don't mention to this name. The user added these two sources with copy & paste method from the article de:Cibranlı Halit Bey. Takabeg (talk) 12:17, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. The evidence presented here by Takabeg and by others who know Turkish in the Turkish Wikipedia deletion disussion is pretty conclusive that this person did not exist. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:55, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't think we can go as far as to say Mîralay Seîd Simbélreş did not exist, but the unverifiable nature of the article's content and the seeming copypasting from another article (including an exact duplication of the commands held and decorations awarded), makes the article too unreliable to continue to exist. Meowy 12:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The content on the Turkish Wikipedia article does suggest he was a real person (there is even a link to what is claimed to be a photo of him in the deletion discussion). So, probably whoever created this English Wikipeda article has created it to be a stub for now, but has done it incorrectly by copypasting into it not only the formatting but the content from an existing article. Given that it was created almost 2 months ago that seems to me to be enough time for proper content to have been added, so I still think it is right to delete it, but it should be done without excluding the option for the article to be recreated at a future date if suitable and verifiable content is found. Meowy 15:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Everything is saying that either this person doesn't exist, or maybe exists but isn't notable - and in any case, the article contents are faked and unreliable. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:30, 10 June 2012 (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.