Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magomed Tushayev


 * 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 SNOW DELETE. No valid reason to not act now, no amount of time is likely to change the outcome. Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 01:29, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Magomed Tushayev

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

There's no indication that this individual is notable except for his recent death (WP:BIO1E). Additionally, the article itself doesn't even describe anything about this individual that would be considered notable, even if it could be verified in reliable sources. I can't find any sources with significant coverage that aren't news articles from the last 24 hours reporting his death. I'd recommend that a mention of his death be added to 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine or another article about these events.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 00:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;—  00:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;—  00:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;—  00:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;—  00:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete – non-notable. The only reasons the media picked this up is because he would've been the first Russian commander killed in the conflict (though he is still pretty low down the command chain). It now transpires he's not even dead. Wouldn't have gotten a Wiki page prior to the false news reports. Fails WP:GNG. --Jkaharper (talk) 00:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete — agree to that it's non-notable and violates WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by I'ma editor2022 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete Non-notable Bio, only mere notability could be his death but it's proven Fake. He is alive and the main source claiming it's death don't suscribe the reliability of the report by Kyiv media. Daily Mail is also a secondary source and is currently blacklisted. Mr.User200 (talk) 01:14, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per reasons given above. Also pointing out that when I removed the PROD, I did suggest draftification over deletion, and less than 20 minutes later, this AfD started, so I am a little disappointed in the AfD starting without the AfD nominator reading the PROD removal reason or starting discussion on talk page.  Nevertheless, it should be deleted now that the AfD began. Elijahandskip (talk) 01:24, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note that draftication is a potential outcome of an AfD. Also, an AfD that results in the deletion of an article doesn't necessarily prevent a draft from being created on the same topic.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 02:01, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Procedural Note: If the outcome of the AfD is Delete, please remove the article from Template:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Elijahandskip (talk) 01:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:BASIC, WP:BIO1E and WP:NOTNEWS. Mztourist (talk) 03:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete In addition to the various policy failures presented by nom and others, previous votes have pointed out that this may be spreading false information. Better to stay away from this for now, and if it turns out he was notable we can re-create the article after we are certain of the facts and of lasting significance. Toadspike (talk) 03:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree that it's non-notable --nycmstar (talk) 04:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Per above. Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 07:58, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:NMILITARY along with several other guidelines as mentioned above. Inter&#38;anthro (talk) 12:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per BASIC; and that being alive, even in a war, is not a claim of notability.   SN54129  13:24, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * NOT DELETE: _You_ may not have heard of him but he is not just one killed combatant but Russian/Chechen general, main ally of Kadyrov and instrigaror of LGBT purges in Chechenia. Of course, you may not care about all that or try to remove him for other reasons - Skysmith (talk) 17:17, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * What you and I "care about" is irrelevant. Was Tushayev the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources prior to his alleged death? If so, provide those sources. If not, then at best he's notable for a single event, and WP's policies don't allow an article to exist in that case. See WP:BIO1E.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 19:17, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Jay D. Easy (t&#8202;•&#8202;c) 21:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Claims of his death are questionable at best, and there are no sources outside of conflicting reports on whether he is alive. Cookieo131 (talk) 02:00, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge content into a related article. This individual doesn't warrant an article, and even his death is not confirmed and may not be true, due to the fog of war. Xcalibur (talk) 03:00, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment – We're passed that stage now. Several new photos and videos have emerged of him since. He's alive, so what would merging to create a section of a non-notable commander achieve? --Jkaharper (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I wasn't updated on that. I suppose that tips the balance into DELETE. He may be worth a mention in the article on the Chechen anti-gay purges, and a brief mention in the invasion article if he's high enough rank. But I'll leave that to others to figure out. Xcalibur (talk) 23:15, 1 March 2022 (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.