Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qyaram Sloyan


 * 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. No consensus for a particular action has emerged from this discussion. North America1000 18:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Qyaram Sloyan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article is about a non-notable Armenian soldier who happens to be one of dozens who fell in the 2016 Armenian-Azerbaijani clashes. In addition, the article is heavily one-sided and relies exclusively on Armenian sources which lay quite serious war crime claims yet to be assessed by independent bodies. Finally, the author seems to be guided by his own POV and suggests himself that the purpose of creating the article was to make a tribute to a dead soldier, which is in violation of WP:SOAP. Parishan (talk) 23:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:SOLDIER CerealKillerYum (talk) 03:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:SOLDIER is intended for notability regarding military careers, and so is not applicable here. It is the manner of the treatment of his body after death that has made the subject here notable in media sources. Murder of Lee Rigby would also fail WP:SOLDIER. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:37, 9 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Kyaram Sloyan is one of the most notable persons of 2016 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes, his decapitation became an important topic for the world media including The Sunday Times, Regnum , EKurd Daily , Agos , RFE/RL Armenia and many others. His death was reported by the Ombudsman of NKR as a grave breache of customary international law on European Ombudsman Institute Official site . Slayan was posthumously awarded by the Medal "For Service in Battle". OptimusView (talk) 14:16, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per media coverage referenced by OptimusView. SJK (talk) 11:59, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - clearly the subject has had plenty of media attention. also per WP:GNG. I also note that reasons such as POV issues are not reasons for deletion, all of that can be fixed via edits and/or discussion at the articles talk page.BabbaQ (talk) 16:10, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Per CerealKillerYum does not quaify the WP:SOLDIER Abbatai 12:32, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per media coverage referenced by OptimusView.--Spetsnaz1991 (talk) 03:52, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect instead perhaps to 2016 Armenian-Azerbaijani clashes as this is closely linked best and is likely best known because of that, nothing else from there to suggest a better separate article. SwisterTwister   talk  06:04, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:BASIC notability guidelines. The article is well sourced with about 20 sources. Sloyan receives at least 5,000 search results on Google, and that's merely in English. Can't see why it should be deleted. Étienne Dolet (talk) 07:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * 80% of those sources are Armenian media, in addition to Regnum known for its partisan coverage of the conflict (evident from its atrocious claims like "Aliyev awarded the soldier who most likely posed with Sloyan's severed head"). Parishan (talk) 19:34, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment – Regarding the notion of "those sources are Armenian media", sources do not have to be in English. See WP:GNG, where it states, "Sources do not have to be available online or written in English". North America1000 16:38, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge to 2016 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes. Not notable enough for a stand alone article. ≥Grand  master  22:03, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Very much notable though, warrants no deletion. Besides, there's way too much information here for it to be merged. A stand alone article is necessary to provide a more elaborate and extensive coverage of all these sources and details. Beheaded? Quite a notable ISIS-like case.92slim (talk) 01:14, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep his decapitation was widely reported in Armenia and has already been raised on the international stage by Armenia. -- Ե րևանցի talk  08:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable person. Neutrality is also violated in the article. The information about beheading is false according to Azerbaijani officials. But in the article it is claimed as a fact. --Interfase (talk) 18:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * so even the Azerbaijani officials issued a statement related to him, and you still claim he is not notable? OptimusView (talk) 19:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually the issue is related not only to him, but all bodies including him. Of course this does not make him notable. He is just ordinary Armenian soldier whose death Armanian propaganda uses to accuse Azerbaijan. --Interfase (talk) 19:19, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Interfase, if your not a notable person opinion here is to be considered sincere, how do you explain your subsequent creation of Murad Mirzayev? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 02:09, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Very simple. Mirzayev clarifies WP:MILPEOPLE as he was awarded his nation's highest award for valour. Murad Mirzayev is National Hero of Azerbaijan, but Sloyan doesn't have such award. --Interfase (talk) 03:31, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge to 2016 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes per WP:ONEEVENT and WP:RECENTISM or delete. There are dozens of such examples throughout history and outlining one of them just because of media coverage is not particularly fair. Being beheaded after death does not automatically confer notability and the bar would be set really low otherwise. Brandmeistertalk  16:53, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Music1201  talk  21:38, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * What I see is still plenty of POV and IDONTLIKEIT reasoning above. Which are not really reasons for deletion. Matters that can be fixed or simply, I want it deleted because I dont like it are just kind of pointless.BabbaQ (talk) 21:59, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment / question There are plenty of sources indicating notability. I do not see legitimate arguments for deletion being made in the AfD proposal - it consists of just content related issues. But I think the question about whether the subject deserves a separate article needs answering. Is there any content in the article that could not be merged into the 2016 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The extensive amount of coverage on Sloyan alone should be enough to merit his own article. We must also keep in mind that due to its controversy, it is necessary to have a stand-alone article to provide as much context as possible. There's a lot of commentary as well; this incident has been lifted to not only mainstream media, but notable politicians as well. These are all significant viewpoints that are impossible to ignore. The stand-alone option appears to be the only reasonable solution here. Étienne Dolet (talk) 02:39, 10 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete I do not see why his notability should warrant such a coverage. Also oppose to merge: Any relevant info is already in main article about the clash, so it is not as if he did not earn any mention. This kind of article does nothing to create a friendly atmosphere.Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 16:44, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note to the admins If we are to draw a hierarchical tree starting with the central page 2016_ Armenian-Azerbaijani_clashes (the context under which Sloyan became known) we see the obvious problem with this article. Sloyan is included in a section titled: Alleged atrocities by Azerbaijan. Notice that the stability of the article was achieved only by mentioning him inside that section (he does not even have a section). At no time a page on any sections of the article (which are all above Sloyan on the hierarchical tree) was created. This is anomalous enough to warrant a deletion, unless Wikipedia is a democracy (I hope not).Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 18:44, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep a decision made partly due to EtienneDolet points that not all of the content is suitable for merging. In addition, given that atrocities like this are defined by international law as not being legitimate actions allowable during conflict, and that the aftermath of this particular incident looks like extending beyond the conflict itself, there is a justifiable case for dealing with it in more detail outside of the 2016 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes article. As has already been pointed out by myself and others, the arguments for deletion made in the AfD proposal are not valid; they consists of content related issues not deletion reasons. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 12:26, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep passes notability WP:BIO by being well cited by several independent sources. --Oatitonimly (talk) 15:28, 12 May 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.