Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Polansky


 * 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.  Sandstein  07:42, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Paul Polansky

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable activist whose publicist has been pushing this shamelessly. Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep A lot of the media sources for the subject are now offline, Ive included a couple from the BBC and will add more as I find them. Perhaps a clean up so it does not look so much as a promotion of his works, to make it look more like an encyclopedia article would be in question.

Declaration of interest on my part is that I know him personally, and can vouch for his authenticy.

His topic area is specialist, and prehaps he is the most sourced researcher into Romany culture and history out from Ian Hancock. Romany affairs may not be everyones cup of tea, or even notable in their own right to some people, so maybe judgement should be left to those who have an active interest in the field of Romany rights and research as to whether or not his entry is valid as a researcher and chonicler of Roma culture of note. Thats my tuppenceworth. Eiri Amach (talk) 10:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Struggling to find significant coverage of this guy in reliable sources, agree that the publicist has been hard at work here. Mt  king  (edits)  22:22, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Yes it has been built almost entirely by 2 SPA's. However content looks reasonably encyclopedic  vs promo, and ability to meet wp:notability looks likely, although not established in the article by references. North8000 (talk) 22:53, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Most everything out there is blog-based, as nearly as I can tell, which doesn't carry much water here. Still, this strikes me as a specialist academic that is an expert in his field, dealing with the history of the genocide of the Roma during WWII. INTERVIEWED BY RADIO PRAGUE as an activist on contemporary health concerns of the Roma people. Hopefully some sourcing will follow, I'm having difficulty but have the definite feeling that this is an individual of sufficient status to merit encyclopedic biography. Carrite (talk) 01:58, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:13, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - The Dateline Australia reference in the article serves to establish notability for the topic, and this article serves to further qualification for notability of the topic: :
 * "Roma and Ashkali in Kosovo: Persecuted, driven out, poisened" (article). From Society for Threatened Peoples Northamerica1000 (talk) 02:40, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Here's another link from a major mass media source, further qualifying notability for the topic:
 * September 23, 1998. "Paul Polansky: The road to Lety." The Prague Post. Accessed September 2011. Northamerica1000 (talk) 03:01, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Another reference further qualifying notability of the topic: "Paul Polansky and the Kosovo Roma." The Telegraph. Another reliable source. Northamerica1000 (talk) 03:50, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment NorthAmerica, I've told you repeatedly what is reliable, independent and significant source is and you just don't get it. An article written by the subject does nothing to establish the nobility of the topic... it is not "independent".  Plus, the topic is not what is at debate here, Polansky is.  The Prague Post article is a wonderful source that covers all the basics of GNG.  The Telegraph article says absolutely nothing about him but recite his poems. Bgwhite (talk) 06:42, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm on the fence as I could understand if the article is deleted or kept. But, I suggest somebody look at Google Scholar more closely.  He is cited and quoted in academic articles.  I couldn't find a "smoking gun" reference that said to keep, but maybe somebody with fresh eyes. Bgwhite (talk) 06:42, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - Per the lead sentence in General notability guidelines, "On Wikipedia, notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a topic can have its own article." Northamerica1000 (talk) 09:55, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Um, the article I mentioned is written by Polansky. That is not independent of Polansky as the topic or the plight of the Roma in Kosovo as the topic. Remember, a references has to be independent of Polansky in order to establish nobility. Bgwhite (talk) 20:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - Here's the lead text from the "Paul Polansky and the Kosovo Roma." The Telegraph article. Another reliable source. Polansky's poems begin after this lead text. There is valid content here. The comments above from Bgwhite regarding this article (verbatim), "The Telegraph article says absolutely nothing about him but recite his poems.", are in error, because again, there is valid content in this article.


 * "JULY 30TH, 2008 1:09
 * Paul Polansky and the Kosovo Roma


 * By tomasocarthaigh

Anyone who knows me from other sites on the web will be familiar with my poems on the Roma, and in particular about the Roma of Kosovo, and Mitrovica in particular. Some eight or more years ago, on the invitation of UNMIK, the human rights activist Paul Polansky led back to Kosovo some few hundred Romany refugees, who occupied aschoolhouse while trying to arrange accommodation. On the starting of the shool year they were moved to camps that they were told were to be for 99 days… those were a LONG 99 days… in over eight years a recknoned 77 died… thats right SEVENTY SEVEN, of lead poisoning, not counting the countless natural miscarraiges among the pregnant women. The camps are in the windcast of the local lead mines, the water is red with lead, red dust swirls around the camps when its dry… all born since they were set up are affected by lead poisoning, amny showing severe effects over the years. While some have been moved, more that have arrived are going into the same camps, and also into the old French Army barracks, and no-one is accountable for this tragedy. True, the Roma refused to go back to the old mahala… its understandable as the Albanians drove them out in the first place, as they attacked and drove out fellow muslims in the local Turk and Bosniak communities, the local Serb, Gorani and other minorities… I include some of the poems from the series here, and the rest can be read on my site. This is a silent genocide against the ONLY INNOCENTS in the Kosovo wars…"

Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment The article is not about Polansky. It says Polansky led him back to Kosovo.  That is the sum total about Polansky besides his poems.  Remember, significant coverage "means that sources address the subject directly in detail."
 * On your statement of "On Wikipedia, notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a topic can have its own article." Bgwhite (talk) 20:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - There are some problems with this article. The article has severe NPOV issues and is not written in an encylopedic tone. However, there are reliable sources provided in the article, as well as this and this. The article requires considerable cleanup, but not deletion. The issue is NPOV, which can be fixed, rather than notability. I'll try and work on the article myself at some point. ItsZippy (talk • Contributions) 17:26, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I looked at some mentions, here and here, and while they are little more than passing mentions, they are in very reliable sources, and together with the other things mentioned here they suggest at least a weak notability. Now, if anyone wants to take a broom to the article, that would be great. Drmies (talk) 01:44, 11 September 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.