Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teodor von Burg (2nd 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 delete. ansh 666 05:15, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Teodor von Burg
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Von Burg is categorized here as a mathematician. If so, then he must have a list of profound and recognized contributions to mathematics. As far as I see, he entered Exeter College undergraduate studies in 2012 but there is no information whether he finished it, no knowledge about distinction or recognitions particular to his study.

No one is a notable mathematician for just being successful at secondary school math level competitions.

His success at IMO is not correctly valued. Von Borg never won the first place. The highest one was the third place in 2010. So, if we give gold medal to the competition winner, the silver to the runner up, then this student would have no more than a single bronze medal in five runs. The criterion to win gold was to get no less than 30 out of 42 points. The real IMO competition star was Ciprian Manolescu, who participated 3 times, and every time he scored perfect 42 points (already noticed by Arimakat).

All those awards are no more than local moral incentives given to a promising student.
 * Strong delete nom --BTZorbas (talk) 18:04, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin: the above bulleted !vote has been added by nominator in direct contravention of WP:AFDFORMAT. --Lambiam 19:48, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2018 January 15.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 00:03, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


 * neutral - I'm not sure that doing well on that hellish dissection isn't notable. I notice that there's nothing on the page since 2012. Nor is there anything I can find about him at a glance. Chances are though, that he'll be producing papers soon, and there aren't that many people in Category:Serbian mathematicians &#x2230; Bellezzasolo &#x2721;   Discuss  17:36, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * delete - I do not see what makes him notable. CLCStudent (talk) 21:25, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep I think that this article should be kept because it meets the requirements of policy. According to IMO's official website he has won four gold medals at the International Mathematical Olympiad, which is the mathematics field most important world event, widely described as the "most prestigious mathematical competitions in the world" and vaguely equal to the Olympics, which is why it's called an Olympiad. He was also won a silver medal and a bronze medal. All these medals can be verified. He is also second in the hall of fame, making him the IMO's second most successful participant ever. A short google search also shows many people describing him as the most successful IMO participant ever, although this is not quite accurate. But then the nominators comments are not accurate either, a gold medal is a gold medal. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 21:58, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Also I will point out that this article was put forward to be deleted before and kept, and the points made then are still valid. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 22:01, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment@Ilyina Olya Yakovna My statements are verifiable, therefore accurate. My main point "No one is a notable mathematician for just being successful at secondary school math level competitions." holds.--BTZorbas (talk) 23:08, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * However describing gold medals from what is widely described as one of the worlds most prestigious mathematics competitions as "local moral incentives given to a promising student" is not the finest example of an accurate statement. Nor is your hypothetical analogy about the medals particularly helpful since I got totally confused and thought you were saying something completely different. Also I think it is unfair to say that he is no longer notable because he is now the second most successful participant at the International Mathematical Olympiad, which is the main reason for deletion, since it was clearly decided to keep the article when he was the most successful participant. This being according to the International Mathematical Olympiad's own rankings, and not your own undisclosed personal ranking of what a notable mathematician is. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 23:27, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment@Ilyina Olya YakovnaPlease, stop distorting my statements. I said "All those awards are no more than local moral incentives given to a promising student." Search for the "award" word in the biography. Medals are not awards nor I ever equate these two things.--BTZorbas (talk) 23:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * In the English language the word "medal" is a synonym of "award" with near identical meaning. You should have specified what awards you were talking about rather than vaguely stating "those awards" as you did not mention any awards other than his gold medals in what you wrote. English is not my first language but I feel you have written your comment in a most unclear way and without saying why exactly Teodor von Burg is not notable. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 00:15, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment@Ilyina Olya Yakovna Please, stop talking nonsense. English language, as any spoken language, is context dependent. I've used these two words ("medal", "award") exclusively in the biography context. The other two users who commented my proposal did not find anything wrong with the proposal.--BTZorbas (talk) 00:37, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Exactly my complaint, you don't give any context, you just write about his IMO medals then make a random comment about awards and expect everyone to know what you mean.

But to break it down. He has: So really my point is why do you think this is not good enough? What possible reason to delete this article is there? It is very clear to me that he is notable according to your policy entitled WP:GNG and the other policy called WP:BIO which says the same. You are just hiding the facts behind vagueness that cannot be understood and pretending your concept of who is a notable mathematician is relevant when the policy clearly disagrees with you. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 01:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * 4 gold, 1 silver, 1 bronze medals at the International Mathematical Olympiad.
 * 3 gold, 3 silver medals at the Balkan Mathematical Olympiad.
 * 2 gold, 1 silver, 1 bronze medals at the Junior Balkan Mathematical Olympiad.
 * He is the most successful ever competitor of the Junior Balkan Mathematical Olympiad.
 * He is the second most successful ever competitor of the International Mathematical Olympiad. (first place for 3 years).
 * Record youngest competitor of the Junior Balkan Mathematical Olympiad, Balkan Mathematical Olympiad and International Mathematical Olympiad.
 * He has taken part in 57 other mathematical competitions, with: 44 first, 11 second, and 2 third prizes.
 * Saint Sava Award, for his contribution and commitment in the field of education.
 * He was awarded the Charter of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts.
 * Karić Brothers Award, in the field of scientific and research work.
 * By my count, ten reliable sources in the article/identified.
 * Another six or so non-English sources, being news reports and biographies that no one has included.
 * A great many of mentions, mostly saying how he is the world's best young mathematician.
 * Strong delete Being a student competitor in math is just not a sign of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:00, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Not by itself, but what about being a world-class competitor in the most renowned international maths competition in conjunction with having received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject? Having written a book is also not a sign of notability, but that is not a particularly good reason for deleting Lemony Snicket. --Lambiam 11:11, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * @Lambiam The most renowned international SECONDARY SCHOOL maths LEVEL competition? Right? That competition is certainly a notable event, but neither of the competitors is a notable mathematician. Right?--BTZorbas (talk) 15:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * BTZorbas, I think you are confusing what is a notable person according to the policy with your opinion of what is a notable mathematician according to an external guide designed for adults, probably professors at that. There is no policy specially for mathematician's on Wikipedia, I have looked very carefully. Also for Wikipedia notability it does not matter that he is not an adult because his achievements are out of the ordinary. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 15:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

It worries me that you cannot see. There is much more, try searching for (16,400 results) and  (52,500 results). Regards. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 22:51, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. So far as I can see his work is cited by nobody. Not a single citation on GS. Fails WP:Prof and WP:GNG, nothing else. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:31, 16 January 2018 (UTC).


 * You might like to look at this essay. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:13, 17 January 2018 (UTC).
 * You might want to actually read WP:NPROF. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 01:33, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I have done that and contributed to several of its archived talk pages. What should I be looking for? Xxanthippe (talk) 01:52, 17 January 2018 (UTC).
 * Well the WP:NPROF policy says it only applies to academics/professors and this person is not an academic and has never worked as one, certainly not as a professor. Then you say that the article "Fails WP:Prof, nothing else.". Yet in the WP:NPROF policy it clearly says:


 * Therefore your recommendation to delete, based on the fact that this article fails an optional policy which does not apply to the article seems really strange to me. Because if the article fails nothing else as you say that should be a reason to keep. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 11:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * @Ilyina Olya Yakovna Could you, please, refrain from further distortions of other people comments and Wikipedia rules misinterpretations? The guideline segment you quoted above talks about notability of AN ACADEMIC NOT ABOUT A SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENT NOTABILITY!--BTZorbas (talk) 12:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That is exactly what I am saying. What part of,
 * Delete. So far as I can see his work is cited by nobody. Not a single citation on GS. Fails WP:Prof, nothing else. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:31, 16 January 2018 (UTC).
 * has any basis in policy or any relevance to this person whatsoever? Sorry for being a perfectionist. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 13:11, 17 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Strong delete, because this is confounding the (possibly already questionable) values of undergraduate contests and their notability, like some Olympics or Olympiads (a misconception of meaning as a contest per se), themselves and the notability of their "medalists", who still have to show their notability on the job. (Does "least non-notable" exist, and is a notable property therefore?) Purgy (talk) 07:40, 18 January 2018 (UTC)′
 * Weak keep (!vote altered per TimTempleton - cultural differences) WP:GNG doesn't require that editors spend time analyzing if somebody is important or not. It simply requires we find if enough coverage in independent reliable sources exists. It undoubtedly does, therefore specific sub guidelines from WP:BIO or others are mostly irrelevant - they are there to help make a decision but shouldn't be abused to delete something simply because one has never heard of it or because subject doesn't meet one specific sub-criteria which might not even apply. If this were the one-time winner of some competition, then yes delete per WP:BLP1E. However, article subject has received sustained coverage for multiple events and, per WP:ANYBIO, "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times." - The 'Charter of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts', if not the gold medals (which I agree are probably not that important), is clearly such an significant award, being awarded by a national level institution. Judging the intent behind the award is WP:OR and does not render the award moot. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 16:30, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment @Ilyina Olya Yakovna alias 198.84.253.202 Yet another misinterpretation of the Wikipedia guidelines from the same person. WP:ANYBIO states: 2. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field. Von Burg is categorized as a mathematician. If so, then where is the list of his contributions "in his specific field"? I found none.--BTZorbas (talk) 20:53, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Pings don't work for IPs. WP:ANYBIO states "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included [emphasis mine]" - there is no requirement to meet all conditions. Of course, it is possible that a subject meets the criteria and is yet not notable, however given the repeated coverage in RS I don't think that is the case here. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 21:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * BTZorbas, what are you talking about? This person has made a massive impact to Serbian mathematics, he is the best known junior mathematics competitor of his generation. This is explained many times in ten national newspapers over several years. And there is no doubt this will remain on the historical record for some time, especially if he goes on to do mathematics after graduation, because it is an achievement that is out of the ordinary. I seriously doubt you are doing anything but trying to hold up your nomination now, seriously there is no shame in making the article better rather than deleting it. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 21:30, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * BTZorbas, what do you base your accusation on that 198.84.253.202 and Ilyina Olya Yakovna are the same editor? Merely on the fact that they agree on this issue? You cannot wildly fling accusations around without specific evidential basis.  --Lambiam 16:25, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Provisional delete . First, let's clarify some things.  He certainly doesn't pass WP:PROF, but that's irrelevant if he passes WP:GNG.  The nomination says that he's listed as a mathematician but is not notable as a mathematician, but again, this is not an argument for deletion (at most, it might be an argument for removal from mathematician categories). But does he pass GNG?  At a cursory look, I really don't think so.  The hits that are being adduced as evidence seem mainly to be what you would call "passing mentions" (e.g., a listing in a table of competition winners).  To support notability, you'd need the source to say, at a minimum, something beyond the fact that he won.  I don't think we want to establish a regime of presumptive notability just for winning math contests, even prestigious ones. I said "provisional" because I could certainly have missed some more meaty coverage in the sea of trivial hits.  If that's the case, the defenders should narrow down the refs being adduced as evidence and point us to the strongest ones.  Also, this is a case where he may not be notable now, but there's a strong possibility he'll become notable in the future, and the deletion should carry no prejudice against re-creation in that case. --Trovatore (talk) 21:35, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * link Article with in depth coverage from Serbian news station B92.
 * link Extended in depth coverage for when Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic congratulated Teodor von Burg on one of his gold medals. Source is from mid-market Serbian newspaper Blic.
 * link An in depth article about Teodor von Burg receiving a scholarship to study at Oxford University after his acclaimed Olympiad successes. Source is from the Serbian newspaper Večernje novosti.
 * link Article in Basta Balkana magazine.
 * link another article from Večernje novosti.
 * I show these articles so that it is easier for you and you don't need to look at all the links or search on Google, where there is more, although it is mostly more of the same, but from different sources. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 22:21, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No. 19 is an interview and No. 26 seems to contain some biographical data - that seems to satisfy the criteria. A good number are indeed simply lists of winners. Agree with the remark against prejudice in case this gets deleted (though one must take care not to get into WP:CRYSTAL territory, unlike Ilyina above). WP seems to have also a lacking coverage of subjects which are not British or American (Battle of Charleroi is an example I'm working on - compare with the excellent coverage on closely related Battle of Mons which involves British troops). As I said above, subject also meets criteria 1 of WP:ANYBIO for winning a nationally prestigious award. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 21:59, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I withdraw my !vote. It does look like there are sources with more than trivial mentions (note to User:Ильина Оля Яковна:  sometimes less is more &mdash; if you had started with those, rather than spamming in tens of trivial hits, it would have been more convincing from the start) .  As to whether the sources are "reliable", I don't have any reason to think they're not, but I also have no familiarity with them.  So I'll abstain for now. --Trovatore (talk) 12:33, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Lack of substantive independent sources that are actually about the subject - unsurprising given his age. WP:TOOSOON, at best. Guy (Help!) 00:50, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Per that linked page, "WP:ANYBIO allows that ANY individual, actors included, may be presumed notable if 'the person has received a notable award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times'," which article subject did receive. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 00:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I give up, even listing 5 articles that are only about this person, people still pay no attention and say it should be deleted, it seems Wikipedia is biased against young people. I will not watch this page now. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 00:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * WP isn't biased against anything - editors are (Criticism_of_Wikipedia). Again, as I said above, coverage of a sourced topic shouldn't be deleted simply because it is something distant to most editors. The sad thing about discussions is that people don't always take the time to read every comment, often making summary judgements with little basis in either sources or policy (often misunderstood). If it was just me, I'd say ignore WP:GNG when it prevents you adding a good article about something, and this is a case were WP:IAR should apply even if there are more persons who say "delete" (ignoring this isn't a vote and that restatement of the same opinion isn't an argument). 198.84.253.202 (talk) 01:45, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete there's no claim of notability other than his performance at high-school level competitions. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 20:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Re above "national level award" + non-trivial mention in RS 198.84.253.202 (talk) 21:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Weak delete - I went to his Serbian Wikipedia page [], to see what kind of sourcing there was, since the limited sourcing for this English article and a Google search in English clearly point to a delete. I don't read Serbian, but was able to identify four news articles from Serbian publications, of which three were just about him.  Amidst a handful of dead links, the rest are announcements about the math olympiad tournament and promotional fliers. That's just not quite enough, especially when you consider how because of cultural differences, this news would be of much more interest to Serbian media than to the US. (Anyone here know that the US was one of two teams ever to get perfect team scores at the Olympiad? Me neither. Fails WP:GNG. Probably also WP:TOOSOON, since there's no current scholarly news coming from Oxford, but that may change and this can be revisited. TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  00:53, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete -- WP:TOOSOON: the subject is not yet notable per review of available sources. High-school level competitions are an insufficient claim of significance. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:02, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * But the subject is not claimed to be notable as an academic - and other claims to notability include national level awards which meet WP:ANYBIO (and judging the intent behind has no basis in any policy). 198.84.253.202 (talk) 02:15, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete: Pseudo-biography that may be TOOSOON. Birthdate/place and nothing elsefast forward--mathematics student that won several awardsfast forward- nothing since 2012. Otr500 (talk) 03:08, 22 January 2018 (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.