Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marjan Bojadziev


 * 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. (non-admin closure) v/r - TP 14:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Marjan Bojadziev

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't pass WP:ACADEMIC or the general notability requirement. Doesn't include any significant third party sources. ·Maunus· ƛ · 16:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Just not notable. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:58, 25 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep President of the Chamber of Commerce, CEO of the third largest bank in Macedonia, economic advising board member of the government of the city of Skopje (national capital of Macedonia, current rector of a major university in Macedonia who takes part in conferences which involve the investment, energy and running of the country and covered in government sources. I rest my case. He is clearly a notable economist and meets WP:ACADEMIC. Macedonian economists generally don't have the coverage that anglo countries have on the web anyway but there is enough here to pass this I think,♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:17, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * At the very least, he would appear to fulfil criterion 6 of WP:ACADEMIC: "The person has held a major highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society." --Hegvald (talk) 20:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * speedy/snow keep first, as CEO of the third largest bank in Macedonia, Macedonian Bank, and second, as college president. I wonder if Magnus wouldexplain why this does not meet WP:PROF #6, and also if andy would care to explain his !vote ?   DGG ( talk ) 21:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought he was currently, provost not rector. I agree that as rector he passes criterion 6.·Maunus· ƛ · 11:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. The trick is to search on "Марјан Бојаџиев", then accept Google's offer to translate from Macedonian to English. The current version avoids controversy. More could be added from articles like this one. I accept Hegvald and DGG arguments that he is inherently notable based on positions held, but place greater weight on the fact that many reliable independent sources have commented on him. Either way, the subject is certainly notable. Aymatth2 (talk) 03:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - He is clearly an important person in Macedonia. There are enough sources to verify that. The article is not very interesting at present, since it mostly lists the positions held, and doesn't say much about him. But that's not an argument to delete. EdJohnston (talk) 03:38, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Color could be added. According to this source as a young man he was a rock musician. "The first important presentation before an audience Boyadjiev have at Rock-Fest 83, when performed independently, under the pseudonym Vox Mayo (who kept during the entire music career) and reached the final." Not the best of translations, but you get the idea. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:52, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I found some "interesting" info about the bank. But this is why I show so much concern by the sloppy indiscriminate tagging of articles for deletion and notability without doing proper research into them. Yes the initial version was a mess created by a Macedonian but the fact that it had even said originally "CEO of the third largest bank in Macedonia" and "Rector of the American University" should have been enough to indicate that he might be notable. This article was nominated on a false premise. He clearly meets WP:ACADEMIC and Andy the Grump quite frankly could be Maunus's minime judging by the same attitude. These people are too lazy to bother trying to prove something is notable. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't worry I won't be tagging more of your articles. There are too many f'tarded assholes who make crappy new pages and resort to personal attacks as soon as someone suggests they may be too liberal in their understandng of what kind of junk is supposed to be in an encyclopedia.·Maunus· ƛ · 11:30, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Well if you call expanding the longest river in France from barely a stub like this and the regular expansion of Municipality stubs like Lorca from stub status junk then you are not worth uttering a single word to. I know that a lot of the work I've done on wikipedia gets thousands of hits everyday and people find them useful. In a year millions of people read the work I've written into wikipedia in total and learn from it and I'm doing what this website was designed for. Testament to the fact I rarely add junk is that 99% of the articles I've ever created remain, if they were really junk and unencyclopedic they'd have all gone long ago. We are not a book encyclopedia and neither are we restricted to solid traditional encyclopedia subjects. If we can have an article about a tiny barn in Iowa and a Linux stub, we can most certainly have an article on the restaurants of a city or a royal wedding dress. I also think I and others make wikipedia a much greater resource by covering parts of the world which are poorly covered and venturing into new and exciting topics and doing something to address the systematic bias. The content I start is generally no different to what already exists for places in anglo countries. One of the core goals of wikipedia is to provide the "sum of human knowledge" which while that isn't meant literally it certainly generally means knowledge which is covered in multiple books and sources which I adhere to with writing articles. Which is more than I can say about the degradation you cause on wikipedia with your daily tagging rather than making a small effort to correct the obvious problems right away. You are the one with the civility problems and attacking other editors for work you think is rubbish, not me. You'd never get me going around telling people to stop contributing and that their work is crap. That's far more uncivil and against the spirit of wikipedia. You are just so up your own asshole that you can't admit to it and that you were wrong about these articles, even if you had a point about the pub being a weak candidate on its own accord. The "civil" way to have dealt with that pub article would have been to contact me on my talk page and state you didn't think it was notable, not add a notability tag to an article after the work had gone into t and getting into a edit war which effectively says "This article is a pile of shit. Your contributions are unwelcome here".♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep as per previous comments, looks perfectly notable. Voting mostly to show overwhelming majority against Andy the Grump. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 12:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - oh come on! Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  15:30, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Macedonia-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Snow Keep Looks like there is a clear case that he meets WP:PROF. Qrsdogg (talk) 00:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. As noted above, he has held very high positions and most definitely passes WP:GNG and WP:PROF. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:53, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly notable, as shown in previous comments. -- Marek  .  69   talk  15:42, 31 May 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.