Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monument to Peter and Fevronia (Bataysk)


 * 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 Speedy keep per WP:SKCRIT. Nominator blocked as a sock per Sockpuppet investigations/FreeatlastChitchat. D4iNa4 (talk) 18:53, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Monument to Peter and Fevronia (Bataysk)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable monument. There are a dozen or more monuments to these saints all over the country. Why is is this notable? No reason. Fails WP:GNG 2Joules (talk) 06:13, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. The references show that it passes GNG. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * @User:Eastmain There are four references. The first one is a local online paper. The website is ranked 43,574 in Russia. Hardly a source good enough for wikipedia. The second is a simple pdf brochure. The third and fourth sources are just as unreliable. This is a local thing, nothing worthy of a wikipedia entry. When a liturgy attracts only 100 people, you can safely say that the event is actually a non event. 2Joules (talk) 06:51, 5 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I am somewhat inclined to merge to The Tale of Peter and Fevronia which perhaps could use a section on such monuments (this is apparently not the only one). Mangoe (talk) 16:53, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is notable in Wikipedia because there is coverage about it.  That's how Wikipedia works.  Creating a list of similar monuments elsewhere is an okay idea, but that does not mean that this one would have to be redirected/merged to that list.  This is fairly long, with details and four sources that I personally cannot really evaluate, but which makes more than be comfortably be included as an item in a list-article.
 * Also, I somewhat question the usefulness of fishing through topics of monuments in Russia in order to find ones where one has no capacity to appreciate them, then nominating them for deletion. If one doesn't have the language skills especially to consider the available sources and/or to search for more sourcing per wp:BEFORE, what is the use of having an AFD?  Is the point to direct the attention of Russian-speaking editors to these various topics?  wp:AFDISNOTFORCLEANUP comes to mind.  Hope no one really minds this complaint. --Doncram (talk) 00:35, 6 July 2018 (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.