Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ndoc Mark Gega


 * 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). Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:40, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Ndoc Mark Gega

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article created by blocked sock-master, article is questionable and highly POV, and it should be deleted Axiomus (talk) 12:28, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  13:16, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albania-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  13:16, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:55, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:55, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - An article created by a Sockmaster is not a valid reason for deletion. Claiming an article is POV is also not a valid reason for deletion. This seems to be a case of WP:IDL. This is a valid notable article which is referenced appropriately. IJA (talk) 15:13, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - as per rationale given by IJA.--Mondiad (talk) 18:22, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Still fails notability? 0 hits on Gbooks. Refs used in the article are unrealiable. Merge content into List of Kachaks if you insist.--Z oupan 19:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - How are the references unreliable? Are the published books which are used as references unreliable? If so please explain how. 0 google books searches means no books on google books, not 0 books on the topic. IJA (talk) 19:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Yeah it's pretty stupid to nominate every single article created by AH..., Anyway I'm not seeing any beneficial advantages to deleting the article .... Plus it meets GNG anyway.... – Davey 2010 Talk 20:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Just about adequately sourced, though it is not a good article. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:28, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That can't be right, this is a forum, and this one is obviously not reliable. The reference that is left is a 1937 travel book, with 1 mention of the person ("It's the song of Ndoc Mark Gega. And he was? A great outlaw")? Should not be kept.--Z oupan 15:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete 0 hits on Google Books. Clearly fails notability. 23 editor (talk) 15:53, 28 February 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.