Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natalya Zemna


 * 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 no consensus. The AFD has received three relists and remained open for around month, and there has been very minimal participation. Both arguments (those of delete & keep) incline me to close this as a "no consensus". (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  16:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Natalya Zemna

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:GNG. Some Ukrainian coverage is cited, but I am not getting the impression that it meets the threshold for independent, significant coverage, or that other such coverage exists. Promotional article about a "herbalist and healer" who supposedly healed her own serious heart condition with herbal remedies. Also founded a non-notable political party that I've nominated at Articles for deletion/Ukrainian Party "Green Planet". Lennart97 (talk) 21:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Lennart97 (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Lennart97 (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Lennart97 (talk) 22:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep: Something as simple as Google Translate would have demonstrated she passes GNG through things like this, this, and this. We can be confident in turn more may exist in Ukrainian. "The article is overly promotional/fringe in its current state" means WP:SOFIXIT. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 22:51, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, coverage exists. Source 1 and source 2 are both nothing more than interviews with the subject, which do not necessarily constitute significant coverage, and I am unable to determine whether these are reliable sources (let me know if you know). Source 3 is a very short announcement that she is participating in an election with her party - seems like routine coverage to me. So I'm interested to know why it's so very obvious that she passes GNG. Lennart97 (talk) 23:12, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Interviews are usually significant coverage; these ones certainly appear to be. The .gov domain on source 1 is a strong indicator of RS-ism in the "doesn't post puff pieces about random people with nothing to write an article about" sense, and while machine translation strips out nuance, the overall vibe I got from the interviews was fairly respectable. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 23:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, that's fair enough. I'm just not as convinced. I really hope we can get some Ukrainian input in this discussion; my request at Wikiproject Ukraine unfortunately didn't result in anything (so far). Lennart97 (talk) 23:26, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bungle (talk • contribs) 10:07, 20 February 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Bold relist for a third chance at native speakers to assist with sources.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 23:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm not seeing any claims for notability in the article, and the sources that I was able to get Google to translate didn't give me confidence that the subject has international notability. SilkTork (talk) 12:18, 12 March 2021 (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.