Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taras Sokolyk


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. After almost a month, there is no consensus here, especially when considering changes made to the article Eddie891 Talk Work 15:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Taras Sokolyk

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:BLP of a political organizer, not properly sourced as having a genuinely strong claim to passing WP:NPOL. As currently written, the main notability claim here is that he exists, which isn't automatically enough in the absence of strong evidence that he would pass WP:GNG -- and while this is a pared-back version of an article that's been moderately longer in the past, I can't revert to older versions as they contained criminal allegations that can't be in the article at all without airtight sourcing for them, and might still just make him a WP:BLP1E anyway. So no prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody wants to write a substantial article and source it properly, but the scandal can't be in the article at all without solid sourcing for it, and he just doesn't have any other meaningful notability claims if this is all that can be said about him outside of the scandal. Bearcat (talk) 06:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  06:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 06:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bearcat - clearly fails GNG. SportingFlyer  T · C  21:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Per WP:HEY. Also by 2008 he was CEO of a major Canadian hotel chain, so not BLP1E, although that wouldn't apply anyway given the sustained years-long coverage of the vote-rigging scandal.Central and Adams (talk) 02:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Being CEO of a hotel company still isn't "inherently" notable in its own right just because you can minimally verify the fact — to become a notability claim that would secure inclusion in Wikipedia, that work would still have to be supported by a lot more ongoing "career" coverage about it than you've added here. Bearcat (talk) 14:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Relisting as there have been major improvements and sourcing to the article since its nomination which haven't been assessed here in this discussion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Final relist for discussing the changes. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:30, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 19:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep While we clearly need to be conscious of BLP issues, the WP:GNG do not ask us to evalute notability on the basis of what a subject does, we evaluate notability on the existence of SIGCOV, reliable sourcing. Very simple searching shows multi-year reliable soruce coverage of this person who featured prominently in a political scandal which received national attention. Satisfies the GNG/BIO, some examples: Vote-rigger rehired: Tory leader gives Sokolyk strategy contract, Winnipeg Sun, 13 December 2002, Tories' Frankenstein monster, Winnipeg Sun, 23 December 2002, Buffaloed in Manitoba, Edmonton Journal, 20 February 1999, Filmon aide quits amid vote-rigging scandal, Vancouver Sun, 24 July 1998 Options discussed for hotel, The Bismarck Tribune, 1 March 2008 Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 04:36, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.