Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Sekulić


 * 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)  Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  07:30, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Martin Sekulić

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Attempt to link this man to Tesla brings just doubts and questions Vujkovica brdo (talk) 16:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Nsk92 (talk) 17:23, 12 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. The link to Tesla is supported by many of the Google Books and Scholar search results above, and there is a sourced statement in the article that says that Sekulić was a "public representative in the Provincial Assembly of the Croatian, Slavonian and Dalmatian Kingdom", which meets the requirements of WP:POLITICIAN as a member of a provincial legislature. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Yugoslavia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. He was just a provincial politician. The link to Tesla is too weak, bears no significance, no notanility.--Vujkovica brdo (talk) 05:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak delete per WP:INVALIDBIO. WP:POLITICIAN requires significant coverage in reliable sources, none indicated. Being "the guy who turned Tesla on to electricity" seems borderline notability but there is no solid claim this is that guy. It makes this more of a WP:INHERITED argument. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 19:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * No, WP:POLITICIAN says that anyone who has been a member of a provincial legislature is presumed to be notable. And if you just look at the Google Books and Scholar searches liked above, which I pointed out before, you will see that there is loads of solid evidence that this is that guy, and that there is plenty of coverage in independent reliable sources about him being that guy. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:40, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:POLITICIAN does not say that (item #3) and no source/evidence has ever been provided that this is conclusively "the guy". The "Tesla echo chamber" you are noting is not direct evidence, just a claim being repeated over and over again. The original claim seems to be Ciril Petešic / 1976 and he only gives us a probability, not direct evidence. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 22:55, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Criterion 3 of WP:POLITICIAN is about local politicians and unelected candidates. Criterion 1 is the one for members of provincial assembles such as Sekulić. And the standard used by Wikipedia for including content is verifiability by reliable sources, not your personal knowledge that those sources are "wrong". 86.17.222.157 (talk) 11:59, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Vaguely described as a quasi official in a vaguely described "entity inside an entity" gives us #3. Could be #2, doubt its #1. At this point we don't guess so feel free to cite the more extensive biographical and/or historical sources already written about this past holder (required for all three). Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Criterion 1 says "Politicians and judges who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members or former members of a national, state or provincial legislature", an exact fit for Sekulić. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:16, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * "exact fit for Sekulić" Source? Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 22:06, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The source saying that he was a member of the provincial assembly is, as I already said, in the article. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 07:16, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The source is vague, the cite does not say he was a member of the provincial assembly (in fact says nothing, needs WP:NONENG), and its a book about Tesla. Can you cite any significant coverage in an independent source? Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 12:40, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * What on Earth do you mean by "needs WP:NONENG"? That policy says that non-English sources are allowed on Wikipedia. You are being played for a fool here by an editor with some kind of weird intra-Balkan nationalist agenda. Take a step back and look at who is following what is said by a secondary source and who is performing original research by giving a personal interpretation by synthesis of primary sources. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:15, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Please read entire policy, namely: "if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request that a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided". Also maybe read WP:TALK Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 00:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:16, 13 September 2016 (UTC).


 * Weak keep. He seems to be primarily known as Tesla's teacher but the legislative post saves him from WP:BIO1E. My keep is weak, though, because it is difficult to find sources that say anything about him other than as Tesla's teacher. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:21, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. Which particular event saves him? WP:BIO1E=People notable for only one event. The legislative post is not a notable event, rather a status. Shall we now write biographies of all members of the Provincial Assembly of the Croatian, Slavonian and Dalmatian Kingdom?--Vujkovica brdo (talk) 05:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * And why not? We routinely keep articles about members of provincial assemblies elsewhere in the world, so what's so special about this one that we should treat it differently? The fact you have fooled one editor into following whatever nationalist agenda you are pushing here, and to follow you in making personal interpretations of primary sources rather than go by what is said by a secondary source, doesn't mean that you have fooled the rest of us. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Surely passes WP:POLITICIAN as a member of the Provincial Assembly of the Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:45, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I have just read the talk page discussion about this article, which seems to have prompted this deletion nomination. Firstly I would note that disagreement about content is not a reason for deletion. More importantly it seems that the editors who have nominated this for deletion and supported it have got the idea of original research totally back-to-front. We go by what secondary sources make of the primary sources, not Wikipedia editors' personal interpretations of the primary sources. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


 * No time to read anything. I'm off with Wikipedia, this is just ridiculous as it seems an oligopoly. Good luck with this none cooperative project. Oriol20 (talk) 14:03, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep.¸This person was notable in his time as a physicist. He was member of the Yugoslavian Academy of Sciences and Arts. He had his work internationally published. He was also a representative in the Provincial Assembly of the Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia (WP:POLITICIAN). The article needs to be extended and not deleted. Kavonder 07:42, 17 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.138.27.160 (talk)


 * Comment - It should be know we have IPs an IP showing up in this discussion that fall into the range used by an editor who regularly WP:SOCKs on this topic. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 01:53, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * By your use of the plural you must be including me in that accusation. Please either withdraw it or, if you have evidence that 141.138.27.160 is a sockpuppet, change it to the singular. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 07:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * "IPs" as in what is showing up on related talk pages. Suspected IP ranges can be found in the SPI. If your IP is not in that group your golden. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 16:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You spoke of "IPs showing up in this discussion". Only two editors identified by IP addresses have shown up in this discussion, so I don't see how your "IPs" (plural) can not include me. Once again, please change it to the singular if you didn't intend to accuse me of any likely wrongdoing. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:58, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Struck. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 18:06, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:25, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:52, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I do not see much biographical data to justify notability. In order to link him to Tesla I do not see much English language sources confirming him being Tesla's influential Physics teacher. One book( Nikola Tesla: istraživač, izumitelj, genij by Tanja Rudež, Školska knjiga, 2006 page 14), in Croatian, says, "U godisnjem izvjestaju za skolsku godinu 1971./72. vidi se da je prof. Martin Sekulic predavao predmete Maschinenlehre (strojarstvo) i Arithmetik (aritmetiku) a bio je i kustos fizikalnog laboratorija u toj skoli". Google translate: In the annual report for the school year 1971-72. see that the prof. Martin Sekulic teaching of the area the Maschinenlehre (mechanical engineering) and Arithmetik (arithmetic) and was also the curator of physical lab in the school. So, not a Physics teacher. --A. Perun (talk) 02:45, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * His link to Tesla is well sourced and Tesla's article has that stated. If you think that's wrong you are free to start a discussion on Tesla talk page. The talk page of Sekulic article also has a great number of sources. I would say that the link to Tesla is not disputed by any source. We don't have any source that says "Sekulic has no link to Tesla" while a great number of sources do state that he was his professor. You can't be doing original research. The article is a bit short, but that doesn't mean it should be deleted. Kavonder 22:38, 26 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.138.31.91 (talk)


 * Comment - the WP:POLITICIAN rational that Sekulić was "a member of a provincial legislature" failed verification. All we seem to have now is WP:INVALIDBIO "person A has a relationship with well-known person B". Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 20:18, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I googled this person and found two Croatian scientific journal entries that mention him:
 * Vukelja, T. (2008). Zajednica fizičara u Banskoj Hrvatskoj početkom 20. stoljeća [The community of physicists in Croatia proper at the start of the 20th century] Studia lexicographica 2(2(3)), pp. 71-99. ISSN 2459-5578. Retrieved from http://hrcak.srce.hr/110735?lang=en
 * - lists him under "Members of the community trained in physics as the major subject"
 * Paušek-Baždar, S. (2002). Prirodoznanstvena sredina u doba hrvatske moderne. [The realm of natural sciences at the time of Modernity in Croatia] Hvar City Theatre Days, 28(1), pp. 237-246. ISSN 1849-0255. Retrieved from http://hrcak.srce.hr/73979?lang=en
 * - mentions him as one of the three high-school professors who were the authors of "valuable scientific discussions of universal value in Rad JAZU", the other two being Josip Torbar and Antun Laska. It continues to specifically point out highlights from Sekulić's work in the rest of the paragraph.
 * So while this is borderline with regard to WP:SIGCOV, there's sufficient evidence that there are secondary sources relevant to this context that found this person worthy of note, and there well could be more. If we can have an article about Barbara Radulović, surely we can spare one for this person, too. The discussion on what relationship he may have had on Tesla seems like a fairly simple content issue that can be resolved separately. Keep. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 20:02, 3 October 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.