Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/THE HISTORY OF THE CYPRUS OLYMPIC COMMITTEE


 * 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   delete. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 23:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

THE HISTORY OF THE CYPRUS OLYMPIC COMMITTEE

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

'' Note to closing admin: The article has now been moved to History of the Cyprus Olympic Committee. I mention this because before I have known an AfD to result in "delete", but the article had been moved, with the result that the closing admin merely deleted a redirect, leaving the article intact: an easy mistake to make.'' JamesBWatson (talk) 14:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Delete, Seems to be original research and an essay. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Seems largely factual and referenced (although the references are going to be hard to check). With a name change and some copyediting this might be the foundation of a reasonable article. Being a badly written article has never been cause for deletion. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I one hundred percent agree, that's why my rationale was it was An essay and seems to be original research. Out of curiousity do we allow a meeting register? I didn't include that but if you read it appears to be discussin one meeting vs. the history of an organization, I'm not sure on this poinit so if you can shed some light I'd appreciate.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete I agree that being a badly written article is not grounds for deletion, but that is irrelevant, as nobody has given that as a reason for deletion. However, the article largely consists of trivia of no particular noteworthiness. As for evidence of notability, of the 3 so-called "references" given, one consists of Minutes of meetings of the Cyprus Olympic Committee, which is not an independent, third party, source; one is simply "Cyprus Olympic Committee", which is not a reference to a document; and the third is "Articles from Cypriot Newspapers of the period 1974, 1975 and 1976", which is not specific enough to be a reference: are we supposed to check through every page of every Cypriot newspaper of those 3 years to find the references? In short, there are no meaningful citations given to any third party sources at all. Furthermore, even if better sources were produced, would there be any good reason to have an article History of the Cyprus Olympic Committee separate from Cyprus Olympic Committee? JamesBWatson (talk) 14:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I am a respectable Greek Cypriot journalist who has written thousands of articles in various newspapers and magazines during the last 50 years, and who gained a lot of prizes for his objective and well-written writing. It is not always necessary for one to mention all the sources one/he is based on writing an article. For a good writer the best documented evidence is the evidence accepted by courts, namely, evidence from written official filed documents, evidence from eyewitness evidence and evidence given by respectable interviewd people. Good evidence is also given by photographs, but courts don't accept them, unless direct evidence cannot be presented. For example, we cannot take the scene of an event and present it before court. In such a case, photographs of the scene are admissible. I have tried to write some articles in the "WIKIPEDIA", with a good faith, after I had noticed that many of the articles written in Wikipwedia about Cyprus and Cypriot People are erroneous or completely unnotable. For example, you edit stories about persons who were good football players in their village or town, but nothing more, and ignore noteable people who were or are very well-known by everybody in Cyprus, "even by our stones". All my articles in Wikipedia are labelled "not noteable", "badly written" etc. For example, my article about the most famous athlete of Cyprus, who is at the same time a recognized scientist and writer (far better than me or anybody else) was rejected as "not noteable" Not notable this person? [As far as I know, this person has ben nominated by University professors for a Nobel Prize - But, please ignore this because nominations are secret and I don't want to reveal my source]. Then who is noteable? Also, my last article "The History of the Cyprus Olympic Committee" was labelled, if I remember well, as "badly written". If you mean that I am not using effectively the English language, then you can feel free to rewrite it. English is not my native language. If you mean that the article does not meet the criteria of a good article,the only thing I can say is that two months ago I published the same article as part of a book titled "Medals won by the Cyprus Republic in important International Games". The book has sold till now 50000 copies. The sale of 50000 copies in a small island of 750000 population, such as Cyprus, shows that the book (and the articles in it were good to read. Last night I noticed in the Greek Wikipedia an article about the Geography of cyprus. It was only a few lines, but completely erroneous. I sat about three or more hours writing a full version about the geography of Cyprus. By the way, let me later have a look in it. Have they deleted it too? The question is. "To write for Wikipedia or not to write".I'll decide very soon. I would like to co-operate, but I seee that I am not welcome.  Meanwhile have a good day! Sorry for being tiring!!! ````  —Preceding unsigned comment added by EGGLI ANDREOU (talk • contribs) 15:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Appeal Please
 * Delete per Watson. Article is nothing but a few lists (not a "history") that appear to have no encyclopedic value at all. Even if they were properly referenced, what is the point? What is the notability? Drmies (talk) 20:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - I do not see why the history of this committee might not be one day the subject for an article, but this isn't it. As remarked above, this is little more than a list of names. Moreover, if what the unsigned EGGLI ANDREOU writes above is correct, this article has already appeared in a published book, and so there might be a copyvio too. Goochelaar  (talk) 21:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps EGGLI ANDREOU or somebody else might want to add some few relevant data from this article to Cyprus Olympic Committee (a kind of partial merge). Goochelaar  (talk) 22:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions.  -- Cyber cobra  (talk) 03:29, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  -- Cyber cobra  (talk) 03:29, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Maybe one day there will be an acceptable article on this topic. This is simply not it. Totally unsalvagable lists with little to no encyclopedic value, and a mess. Besides, I don't see a need for a standalone article. The article for the committee itself is very short. Tim Song (talk) 04:14, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This could be just a section in the Cyprus Olympic Committee article. No reason to have a separate article about its history especially for an article that has no reliable citations. But I'm afraid there is another twist to this story. The arguments, patterns of writing etc. of user EGGLI ANDREOU follow the same pattern as User:Charls Andre who kept writing similar articles, all of which were deleted. I see this article also features Andreas Savvides, who coincidentally was also the subject of an article written by Charles Andre and was deleted. We may have a sockpuppet case here. That wouldn't be a shock to me. Dr.K. logos 05:17, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

"For example, my article about the most famous athlete of Cyprus, who is at the same time a recognized scientist and writer (far better than me or anybody else) was rejected as 'not noteable' Not notable this person? [As far as I know, this person has ben nominated by University professors for a Nobel Prize - But, please ignore this because nominations are secret and I don't want to reveal my source]."
 * Comment Please also note EGGLI ANDREOU's comments from above:


 * His contributions thus far do not include any articles about famous Cypriot athletes/Nobel Prize nominees. Except if this is an inadvertent acknowledgement that he wrote the deleted article "Andreas Savvides", under the Charls Andre username. Dr.K. logos 05:35, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Have a nice day. (We keep copies of what we write on Wikipedia.) Have a nice day. Written by Eggli Andreou. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.7.247.76 (talk) 13:52, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hallo there. Let's put things in order. Evidence collected and published in our books and articles is not conducted by only one person. Specifically, the evidence collected and published is done by a group of researchers and journalists, consisting of the following persons who are using the main computer of our Agency: Charls Andre (manager), Eggli Andreou, Andreas Broccoli, Ahilleas Severis, Vironas Varnavas, Marinos Perseas, Ioannis Alexandrou, Isaak Neocleous, and Mattheos Lucas. Our Agency is registered with the Cyprus Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and Tourism (this Ministry is responsible for the copyrights also) and is called "Snooperscope Agency". Its Registration Number is A/A 18014a. The Agency is divided into Departments. The above persons and I belong to the Department "Antique & Modern Book Publishers", and some of us belong or head Departments, such as the "Police & Government Exams", which is responsible for publishing and keeping up-todate books used by canditates for police, government and other exams. By the way, one of the pages in our book "General Knowledge" refers to Wikipedia, a book which was originally written by A. Savvides, but since 2005 we have been revising it almost once a month to keep it abreast of the times. The article "Geography of Cyprus" written in Wikipedia by Eggli Andreou is from this book.  Our main Office is in Grypari 7, Aglanjia, Third Roof. Andreas Savvides has nothing to do with us now, though we run to him for advice when needed. After all, most of us were students of him, and respect him a lot. Now he is a pensionist millionaire, who happens to live in the first and second floor of our building, which belongs to him. When we want to research something about his life, we often search his great number of files in which he keeps thousands of articles written in newspapers about him. Everybody knows him very well here in Cyprus, except perhaps  some young persons below the age of 20 who do not know him personally. However, often young persons, who hear stories about him from their fathers and grandfathers visit him to see him and his personal museum. About one month ago, a group of six young people visited him. To his surprise, one of them brought with him two steel, six-inch nail and asked him to bend them with his teeth. Andreas told him. "My young man, even though Jesus is very old, he is still stronger than all the saints. You must believe in him even though you have never seen his miracles or touched his wounds. Believe what your fathers saw by their own eyes and what they say to you", and grasping the nails from his hand he cut them into four pieces. The young man apologized for his rudeness to him. Note that A. Savvides has never liked publicity, and everything we do is known only to his sons.
 * Pare down and merge - This seems like a very easy solution. Cyprus Olympic Committee is not a terribly large article and the useful parts of this article can easily be incorporated into this main article. matt91486 (talk) 05:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment This won't work. None of the sources in the article are verifiable. Also have you noticed that one of the seven founders is "Andreas Savvides", the subject of a now deleted article? How can we import any of this uncited and dubious info anywhere? Dr.K. logos 21:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You have to remember that Wikipedia does not have an online sources requirement. In theory, they are verifiable with archival research. matt91486 (talk) 01:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately if I have to remember something I remember the last time that user Charls Andre sent copies of his sources to user Yannismarou, an admin, with similar haughty claims and Yannismarou checked them and found nothing relevant to the claims that Andre was making in the now deleted Andreas Savvides article. So, if recent memory is any guide, how much do you want to bet that very little can be supported even by a tedious archival search. Also archival of old Greek newspapers is a tricky thing. Their archives may not even exist. Or the newspapers themselves may be extinct. Dr.K. logos 02:26, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I have no objection in principle to the merge suggestion, but I can see two problems in practice. Firstly, most of the reasons advanced for deleting this article (poor sources, etc) would still apply to any material merged, and secondly why would anyone want to? Frankly, most of the material is of little interest, even if it can be sourced. Certainly there can be no justification for keeping both articles, and a "pare and merge" would be much better than the present situation, but simply deleting "this uncited and dubious info" as Tasoskessaris (signature Dr.K.) called it, would be better still. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The last entry above is the best solution. Congradulations to this administrator. However, just for history, the names of the seven founders must also be included. Meanwhile, I have visited the main article "Cyprus Olympic Committee" and I have noticed that Kikis Lazarides is the President. Error!!! He was a President. Now the President is Uranios Ioannides. User Eggli Andreou —Preceding unsigned comment added by EGGLI ANDREOU (talk • contribs) 15:27, 16 August 2009 (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.