Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toma Ciorbă


 * 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   snow keep. Appears to be a bad-faith nomination in retaliation for another AfD. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:05, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Toma Ciorbă

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable individual. One physician like many other around the world. Probably he is known, or even notorious on local geographical area, but globally, definitely he's not notable. Also, from the only 2 sources the first one does not count as it is the website of the hospital which is named after this individual. So it's not reliably third-party published source.

94.102.49.88 (talk) 19:02, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment Article was tagged for AfD by the above IP editor, who posted the above text on the article's talk page and then transcluded the talk page to the daily AfD log. I'm completing the nomination process as a courtesy to the anonymous editor, but the article looks like a clear keep to me.  The subject having a postage stamp in his honor, while not in itself proof of notability per se, is surely an indication that if there's a problem with the article, it's an insufficiency of sources rather than a lack of notability.  -- Finngall   talk  20:33, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep There is an infectious disease hospital named after him. I agree that the issue is with lack citations, not notability. RobBertholf (talk) 22:36, 2 April 2015 (UTC) WP:Clearly notable


 * Definite keep While sourcing could be more robust, those citations which exist as of the most recent version of the article are sufficient to satisfy WP:GNG. The nominator should also note that notability, as regards Wikipedia policy does not hinge on a "global" familiarity, but rather on sourcing, and that AfD's should not be filed before one is familiar with the relevant policies and has done due diligence in searching for additional sourcing.  I trust that the nomination was made in good faith, but it was clearly not altogether appropriate in this case.  S n o w  let's rap 23:33, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Snow keep refs 2 and 3 are more than enough for a claim of notability. And being depicted in a stamp is one of these sort of things that does not happen if you are not really notable. Looking at the relevant ANI thread, it looks just a retaliatory AfD, please close it soon. Cavarrone  08:00, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Moldova-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 4 April 2015 (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.