Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Satvet Lütfi Tozan


 * 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 delete per nominator. (non-admin closure) Nordic   Dragon  14:25, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Satvet Lütfi Tozan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A PROD was removed without comment or improvement. The article fails WP:BIO for referencing and notability, and appears to be a promotional piece of WP:Original research. A search found only mentions of the name but no significant coverage. — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:50, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn -- see my statement below. — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:18, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. 16:59, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. 16:59, 17 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep The article is a translation of . In addition there are two biographies of him:, and the name has appeared in the news recently: , . So he meets WP:BASIC. It would take someone fluent in Turkish and English to fix up the translation, ensure no original research has crept in, and add information from the other sources so that we're not presenting just one point of view. Worldbruce (talk) 06:38, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding those sources. I agree that your referencing has clearly established his notability. Unfortunately, the main source also shows that the entire article was created as a foundational copy-paste and the direct translation is a derivative copyright violation. (I should have gone with my gut instinct when I saw language like "When deceased, he was rich like croesus.") The photo is also a derivative copyright violation -- cropped from the book cover. The article and image require speedy deletion per WP:G12 and WP:F9. However, I have no objection to a recreation of a page about this person using original language based upon the sources. — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:18, 22 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.