Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sergei Ivanovich Vasiliev (3rd nomination)


 * 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   procedural keep. (non-admin closure) Armbrust The Homunculus 15:58, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Sergei Ivanovich Vasiliev
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article had been twice exposed earlier on removal, however it was left with the comment "there is no consensus" while my arguments were ignored (1, 2). After the removal from  some  unreliable sources and sources where it was absolutely spoken nothing about Sergei Vasiliev, there were only three links, 2 of which – the official site. It isn't enough for acceptability of WP:GNG. I suggest to delete the article. — 213.87.xxx.xx (talk) 18:48, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't mean to put this back on the nominator, but how do you know about this article, WP:AFD procedures, and how to nominate one? In particular, why did you choose this article? Additionally, I did not see your contributions on the old afd. Is this a new account? In any case, I vote Procedural Keep due to the older discussion, and the fact that multiple afd discussions in short repetition is disruptive. Tutelary (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Earlier I edited from dynamic IP address (213.87.xxx.xx). 213.87.xxx.xx (talk) 04:14, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Procedural Keep While consensus can and does change, sending an article to AFD so many times in just a few weeks is disruptive. That this is the first thing you've done as an editor is more than fishy as well, and smells of socks and/or POV.  Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124;  WER  19:05, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep - too soon to start more drama. Bearian (talk) 19:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Procedural Keep - Go and be bored elsewhere, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  19:41, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * At previous nominations the sources were not taught upon many subjects. As I’d started to tell that one or another source was unreliable or just did not fit because of the lack of information about Sergey Vasilyev, no one answered  on my comments. It had been just discussed that someone was using  Sockpuppets and that the article was not libel. My opponents had not displayed yet the regularity of the sources in accordance with the norms written in the rules. I would like to receive these comments at that discussion. 213.87.xxx.xx (talk) 04:14, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Each AFD is a stand alone discussion, we don't import old comments. That would be gaming the system. I notice you calling other editors "opponents".  This isn't a contest or a battle, it is a discussion. If you wanted to contest the old AFD, you should have taken it to WP:DRV but you chose to have a new discussion instead. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124;  WER  11:46, 18 June 2014 (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.