Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valeri Lilov (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. Sockpuppets have been ignored, and apparent single-purpose !voters have been very heavily discounted here. Courcelles (talk) 06:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Valeri Lilov
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable youth chess player, previously deleted at Articles for deletion/Valeri Lilov. This is essentially the same article with somewhat more puffery, and the same external links from the body of the article formatted as references. While possibly impressive if you just glance at the wall of text in the "References" section without reading them, they are either trivial, primary sources, written by himself or his employers, or a combination of all three. The only reference that is independent and nontrivial is this, and if shaking hands with a sitting head of state met WP:BIO, I'd have an article too. Falls well short of WP:GNG, WP:BIO, and WP:ATHLETE. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 14:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash;Korath (Talk) 14:50, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: Notified WikiProject Bulgaria and WikiProject Chess. —&mdash;  Chzz  ►  15:10, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete again. "Tiger" Lilov really seems to want a Wikipedia page to help sell his chess tutoring (oh, you thought his "lectures" and "broadcast" were free?). As the nom points out, the references are mostly spurious, self-published, and primary sources like rankings which don't show anything. A 2007 Bulgarian web article about a chess tournament doesn't exactly cut it to meet WP:BIO.  Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 15:11, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Dear Wikipedia Admins,

This is Wangshujuan, the creator of the article “Valeri Lilov.” After an extensive research on why my article was repeatedly declined to be published, another Wikipedia admin/associate told me to read through the official Wikipedia article on notability and find proofs on why my article is about a notable subject, whose information is proven by independent secondary sources. The admin also mentioned that my article is completely publishable by all Wikipedia rules and if he was responsible for it, he would definitely let it be published in its present form.

Here are a few proofs I took from the following Wikipedia page on Notability of people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BIO) which clearly define my subject, from the information provided in the article, as notable by Wikipedia standards.

1) “Basic Criteria: […] If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be needed to prove notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability.”

The article ‘Valeri Lilov’ certainly does not provide one independent secondary source with deep coverage of his work and achievements in his field of tournament chess and private chess coaching, yet many secondary sources – websites with tournament final standings and short articles published on the internet regarding his awards in tournaments - do prove that he is a notable subject by the criteria described in the original Wikipedia passage cited above. (For more information please, review the references supporting Valeri Lilov’s tournament achievements in different countries.)

2) “Additional Criteria: […]

1. The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times. “

Valeri Lilov has won a number of prestigious tournaments throughout Europe during his chess career so far and all the verifiable events won have been cited and properly supported with legit references on his proposed Wikipedia article. One of the most significant awards is that he became a European Champion in his age division (also cited).

3) “Creative Professionals: The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors”

As seen from the references provided about Valeri Lilov chess coaching career, he is widely cited for his published works, two DVDs by ChessBase, and is also regarded as “important figure” – popular coach – by his peers and successors.

I hope these proves are enough to show why the “problematic” article ‘Valeri Lilov” is about a notable subject and should be created to be part of Wikipedia. Please, let me know if you need more proofs for notability or more precise citations from the actual article ‘Valeri Lilov’ itself. Please, take some time and review the many references provided to support this article’s information and you will be convinced of the legit notability of this person.

Thank you for your cooperation!

Sincerely,

Wangshujuan

Wangshujuan (talk) 15:20, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment There may be sources in Bulgarian; this (Google translate) from 24 Chasa might help.  Chzz  ► 15:27, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

The article for Valeri Lilov, currently nominated for deletion, provides a number of additional secondary sources, citing Valeri Lilov's achievements in different internationally recognized tournaments and competitions. The present references provide also an article, written in Bulgarian and translated into English via online translator, showing Valeri Lilov, receiving an award from the president of the Republic of Bulgaria. The contents of the article is carefully filtered from the previous deleted version and new information is added, as well, so that the new form of the article is properly verified statement by statement through each of the references given at the end of the article.

Wangshujuan

Wangshujuan (talk) 15:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Every one of the sources you present regarding the tournaments are primary, not secondary, and the moreto.net article says nothing about an award; even if it did, neither it nor the tournaments are "well-known or significant awards or honors". If his chessbase dvds have actually been cited at all, let alone widely cited, you haven't shown that, and I can find no evidence to that effect; you've merely shown that the dvds exist. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 15:46, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:52, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - Much of the fuss relates to the fact that chess is considered a sport in Europe and a board game in America. One could argue for inclusion of this subject as clearing the ultra-low "pro athlete" bar and perhaps that is the right call. Carrite (talk) 17:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The "have participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level such as the Olympics" criterion? There isn't even a claim that this individual has done so&mdash;those listed are far from the highest levels. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 18:17, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Valery Lilov is an innovative and already well-known chess trainer using the latest internet technology to coach chess players worldwide. Like Dan Heisman, Danny Kopec, Jeremy Silman, Yasser Seirawan or Arthur Yussupov he also provides high-level chess trainings on one-to-one as well as on top chess websites like chess.com, chessbase.com (DVDs) and many more. With his great pedagogic talent he is professional in teaching chess players on different levels. As he is already very present in the chess community I think that Wikipedia should present him as young up-coming chess player and already known chess trainer on his website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.203.188.206 (talk) 19:52, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and I do not think he is notable enough yet (may be in the future). Usually the critera is Grand master or Woman Grandmaster, except for some junior players.  There are some International Masters (IM), if they are noted for training, writing, or as an arbiter or composer.  He has not reached the IM level and doesn't seem to be as notable as the IMs who have been included for training or writing.  Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 21:07, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - Keep it!!! he is a great coach and a strong player — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.83.17.102 (talk • contribs)


 * Keep - there are worse players and coaches with a wiki article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.247.1.161 (talk) 05:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Worthwhile addition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.139.148 (talk) 04:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

--Dmncmm (talk) 10:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Keep it. I have been in touch with Valery for some time during the last year and a half. I believe he's a pure person as well as a great chess player and a coach. He's really committed to diffuse the chess game around the world, specially on Internet. The article someone is looking to delete is just his real history and provides a background of what is his mission in chess playing and chess teaching.


 * Keep - I do not think that the entry violates Wikipedia rules: Valeri is a talented young player and teacher, and I can't find anything wrong in the text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.224.160.14 (talk) 10:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Monokroussos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauri_Shankar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Heisman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_De_La_Maza http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leontxo_Garc%C3%ADa you will be ashamed to claim that they are more notable people than FM Valeri Lilov. Why are they on Wikipedia and FM Valeri Lilov has to be deleted? I ask contributors who are also professional chess players to comment here. FM Valeri Lilov has many achievements (isn't European Champion a notable title?) both in his chess and coaching career and they’ve been achieved at such a young age. Isn’t that called “notable” for Wikipedia? Please, before deleting indiscriminately, check up what you have accepted in the past as notable.
 * Keep - The proposed Wikipedia article written for FIDE Master Valeri Lilov is strongly supported by his many achievements at such a young age. Contrary to some of the previous statements, many Wikipedia articles about FIDE Masters have been published successfully and it’s not only IMs and GMs who have place on Wikipedia. If you review the Wiki articles for the following FIDE Masters:

Thanks, Alexis Alexis880507 (talk) 13:07, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * comment The "European champion" was for boys under 10 years old. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 15:10, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep it! FM Valeri Lilov is a great person. He has many great achievements in chess and chess coaching at such a young age. He is sharing his gift for chess with many others and helping those people benefit in their chess career. I don't see any reason to delete his Wikipedia profile because he is such a notable person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.204.253 (talk • contribs)


 * Delete this article, although I do eye a possibility of a neutral article, by this, I mean an article based on sources independent of Mr. Lilov, not necessarily one which balances praise and criticism. As per Glenfarclas, the current article looks like a promotional piece, with all the sourcing being based on self-published commercial links. Articles like that are unfortunately detrimental to Wikipedia's aim to be a neutral and fair enyclopedia, unfettered by commercial interests. Now, Mr. Lilov's ChessBase DVDs on the Queen's Gambit Accepted and the Sicilian Kan Variation have been reviewed independently, and that independent reviewer agrees that Lilov is an excellent teacher, although he was less-than-impressed with the Kan DVD. If there is additional independent coverage of Lilov as a chess player (which would probably be in Bulgarian), beyond just tournament results, then there may be place for a biography on him. FM-strength is usually below what we expect for chess player bios though. While attaining the FM title at 16 is a very good achievement indeed, it is not an outstanding one, there are people who attained the much more exclusive grandmaster title at a considerably younger age. Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * KEEP

Valeri Lilov is a very respected teacher and is known for his high quality and pedagogic way of teaching. After a thoroughly examination of your games he will send you the video recorded session as well homework.

There was mentioned that he does not give lectures and lessons for free; who does? Can you get a professional painter painting your house for free? There are dozens of teachers on Playchess.com and ICC, and NONE of them give lessons for free, so that is a strange, to say at least, comment to make.

As for his FM title, well, he has one, plus 2 IM norms.

And for his games, which as far as i know were also doubted to be real, a real chessplayer simply can check them on a database, in my case Chessbase 10.

All the allegations are therefore false, and if someone wants to say otherwise, i would be glad to reject them.

Yours sincerely,

Laotse1970 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laotse1970 (talk • contribs) 15:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * KEEP - This has the potential to be a strong article on a notable person. There many far weaker articles on far weaker topics on wikipedia KnightFireNC (talk) 16:16,2 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * "KEEP"' Valeri Lilov is a respected Chess coach and respected Chess player. He is an ethical teacher and a kind person. In no way does his Wikipedia page/article infringe on any person or body. It should be kept for all to be aware of Valeri's love and appreciation for the chess community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Earwax2010 (talk • contribs)


 * "KEEP"' Valeri is very qualified chess player and the chess trainer. His lectures and trainings-course on a game server playchess.com are very popular and make very big success among players of the most different level. I wish him success in all its undertakings! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malysch (talk • contribs)


 * KEEP Valeri Lilov is an established chess coach and is thus significant enough to deserve his own wikipedia article. Since the facts about his playing career were also verifiable, I see no reason to delete the article. Phmilet (talk) 18:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * KEEP Surely an established FIDE Master (easily verifiable) and coach with professional DVDs and a high standing in the chess world deserves an entry on Wikipedia. § —Preceding unsigned comment added by Placy (talk • contribs) 18:44, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Grand Master probably merits an article - Master not really. There are a lot of people at that level. (Been through this in another AfD...) Not happy about the promotional aspects of the article, either. Nor about the flock of socks sorry, the influx of single purpose accounts enthusing about the qualities of the subject without troubling themselves to read the policies of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a free webhost, no matter what some people think, and article status is governed by certain policies. OK, there are articles 'weaker' than this - go ahead and tag them. This isn't Pokemon - we can't catch 'em all. Not all at once, anyway.... The more of these SPAs that appear, the more I am usually convinced that an attempt is being made at gaming the system. A word of advice: This is NOT a vote by numbers. Peridon (talk) 19:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep There is absolutely no reason to delete this page. There is no comparable chess coach using all the new internet technologies and beeing really dedicated to his students at the same time. At his young age he is allready training hundreds of chess players and i can't remember any other coach to do that at this age, not even in history! Saying Masters don't deserve an article on Wiki is complete nonsense especially if they are very good trainers. The strongest trainer in the world (Mark Dvoretzky) is "only" a Master and he deserves the article before most of the Grandmasters he trained. If there would be a rating for coaches Valeri Lilov definately would be Grand Master Level in there way before most GM's on Wikipedia. As for a chess player: He is still a youth player 2400+, one norm away from the IM-Title. In my opion he fits every demand to have a WIKI article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaskins de (talk • contribs) 19:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep[3:09:16 PM] Amy Walker: Valeri Lilov is the chess coach--and player--I admire the most, above all others except perhaps my Uncle Wesley, who first taught me how to play and thus introduced me to this wonderful game! How high must someone reach, and how much must they accomplish, before they are deemed worthy of an article on an encyclopedia that ANYONE can edit? If I myself were to write a Wikipedia article about my chess accomplishments, that would be ludicrous because I have not made a name for myself in the chess world yet. Valeri has. He is a certified FIDE Master and legitimate chess tutor, and not some random "patzer" who posts poor-quality video chess lessons on YouTube without ANY formal ranking or ELO rating and expects people to follow his instructions. I owe this man EVERYTHING when it comes to who gets the credit for teaching me such great chess while being a fantastic player himself! If you wish Valeri to become a GM before he finds his way into the Wikipedia spotlight, I guarantee you that he'll get his norms before he's 25. If you delete this article, you delete an article about a maven! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakhmaty (talk • contribs) 20:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Valeri Lilov is a very bright talented young man who has the respect of chess players of all playing strengths world-wide. A FIDE Master and dedicated coach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charl.chess (talk • contribs) 21:07, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

To say most 'KEEP' messages are sockpuppetry is a cop out, because the KEEP messages are true. FIDE Master Valeri Lilov is very noteworthy, he is one of the most popular chess teachers there is today. He is more popular than most IM's and even GM's. His dedication in chess with lectures, teaching, training is phenomenal. When he started teaching at the age of eleven, he never looked back. Vastly becoming one of the most versatile trainers using the latest technologies with the most services I have seen. Don't delete him because he is not an IM or GM. He spends most of his time teaching. If he spent most of his time playing chess, he would have been a GM a long time ago. Valeri is a very bright, upcoming prospect for wikipedia, to delete him from your resources is absurd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.100.130 (talk) 09:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note Almost all of the "keep" users have been blocked for sockpuppetry, see Sockpuppet investigations/Wangshujuan. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 22:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable and the prolific sockpuppetry is a better indicator of this than the lack of reliable sources. Christopher Connor (talk) 04:45, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - It is true that his wikipedia page may need some touch up, but that is no reason to delete it.


 * Keep I have investigated the matter and from my online research it looks that Valeri Lilov is a professional chess player as he has a high designation of a FIDE Master. Also, because of his high achievements in the last few years (extremely high rating for a FIDE master (2400+), DVDs with chess lectures and articles) I think that the Wikipedia admins should give him a chance. I believe that our idea is to stimulate and encourage the development of such people, not to delete the profile and claim that they are not "notable" when it appears that many other less famous chess players/trainers are allowed to have an article here. In addition, it looks that he is a prominent chess coach and instructor on the internet and has provided guidance to aspiring amateurs for which reason, it looks that so many Wiki users are supporting him about. I am neutral to the matter, as I just saw it in the Sportspeople-related deletion discussions, but in my opinion that young man deserves an article here. Sandons (talk) 15:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandons (talk • contribs) 15:23, 23 July 2010 (UTC)  Sandons (talk) 15:43, 23 July 2010 (UTC) — Sandons (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * What are the independent sources that have written about his importance? I couldn't find any articles about him in the chess magazines and web sites that I checked- I did find things he's written about himself, but that doesn't really demonstrate anything other than his ability to make a web site. Three articles that are about him, in real newspapers or magazines, would eliminate the need for him to create so many sockpuppets (or send his students)- doing so doesn't serve any purpose other than to associate him with bad behavior on the internet.   -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. I searched, and I was able to confirm that he exists, and plays chess competitively, but couldn't find any significant writing about him in independent, nontrivial sources.  Without such sources, there is no verifiable information that can be included in an article- when you remove all the information that is not verified by independently from the article, you are left with nothing at all, and so an article can not be written about him at this time. If the enthusiasts who are coming here to say 'keep' want to help, they should do so by submitting articles about his significance to chess magazines, newspapers, and significant web sites- Wikipedia can only publish information after it has been published in independent sources.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Elo rating too low to be notable, and no notable achievement in chess. He is only FIDE master, which is not a great achievement by itself. SyG (talk) 08:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

- is an author of two chessbase DVD's (Chessbase is the most famous puplisher of digital chesscontent, at least in Europe) - records lectures on very popular chess websites (chesslectures.com for example) - gives lives broadcasts on playchess.com (for free, not that it matters in this subject) Makes him a publicly known person in the chess community, which is, in my opinion an interpretation of the wikipedia rules a reason for leaving the page on wikipedia. This can be verified by searching on the chessbase.com website for the word 'lilov' in both the homepage and shop section. Everyone involved with chess will recognise Chessbase as a valid source.
 * Keep. I'm one of Valeri's students. Nevertheless I wouldn't ask the community to keep this page if I did not want it to be so myself. I'm 31 years old, and when I first got my lesson from Valeri he was only 17! He is very talented in chess and teaching, and I'm sure he will become a very famous chess teacher. I can understand that being talented on itself is not enough to have a page on wikipedia. However, the fact that he:

Thank you for reading my comment, I'm not a regular Wiki contributor (I am a regular reader!) so I might made a mistake in doing this. 81.83.18.153 (talk) 08:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Today I came across this article for deletion and after reading the comments and the article itself, I tried to correct it appropriately and also include more links to secondary sources to verify the information, provided for this young Bulgarian chess player. Tomorrow, I hope to find and supply you with more links to independent sources. Please, don’t delete this article outright and give a chance to the young to develop and receive recognition from reknowned websites like Wikipedia. I hope that if someone else helps me correct this article and/or provides me with valuable advice on how to further improve it, it has place on Wikipedia. Thanks! IvanSokolov (talk) 17:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Giving "a chance to the young to develop and receive recognition from reknowned [sic] websites like Wikipedia" is not what Wikipedia is about. It is not for promotion of anyone. I always find it amazing how many people who haven't edited Wikipedia before just accidentally come across an article up for deletion and immediately set about trying to rescue it. Rather heart-warming in some ways, except that we never usually see them again anywhere else..... Peridon (talk) 01:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia admins must remain impartial/unbiased in their decision on whether to delete an article, regardless of the attempts made to save it by anyone. The decision to delete or keep an article should be solely based on the merits of the subject presented in a proper and neutral Wikipedia format and not on comments, attacking the creators/editors of the article. I am Valeri Lilov's compatriot and naturaly want to help him. Lilov is already famous enough and won't tangle over a Wikipedia page for the purposes of executing his marketing plan or increasing his sales, etc, etc. If you google 'Valeri Lilov', you will see that there are four other results emerging before his Wikipedia page and many more after it. Those, interested in his services will not look for a trainer on Wikipedia, will they? Obviously, some Wikipedia contributors pay too much attention on being a perfect Wikipedia writer by deleting whole pages, rather than taking action and correcting them themselves, so that an article becomes permissible to be kept on Wikipedia in its form and contents. IvanSokolov (talk) 05:22, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I would still go for delete here even if he were my compatriot. Nationality doesn't come into it. If Lilov were famous enough - and this were reliably attested - we wouldn't be having this discussion. Having a Wikipedia seems to be seen as a mark of prestige. This is witnessed by the numbers of minor professors, personal trainers to famous people we've not heard of, obscure martial arts trainers and little known financial consultants who try to get pages for themselves. (To say nothing about the garden maintenance contractors and computer repairers...) Peridon (talk) 10:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You, and others who are supporting keeping the article, say that he is famous. However, there's a very, very simple thing that you can supply that will help us keep the article: links to three articles about Valeri Lilov's importance that have been published in newspapers, magazines, books, or significant web sites.  That's articles about his importance- not discussions about him on a forum, or advertisements for his products, or links to his web site, or blurbs about his wins and losses.  There are several significant chess magazines.  A famous chess player will have been the subject of articles in more than one of them.  If, as you say, Lilov is a famous chess player, simply add links to the articles about him that those chess magazines have published.  And then we'll keep the article.  No amount of simply saying 'he is famous' will be helpful, but citing real sources will solve the problem completely.  If he hasn't been written about in any depth by any chess publication anywhere... then he isn't famous.  He might be a good chess player, a nice guy, kind to animals, an inspiration to his students... but that doesn't mean that an encyclopedia needs an article about him.  Right now, he's giving the impression of a person who isn't famous, and so would like to use Wikipedia to advertise his products.  That isn't what Wikipedia is for.  It's just an encyclopedia.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment/Reply - FisherQueen, today I spent a lot of time on research and found many independent sources in newspapers and significant websites, writing about Valeri Lilov and his achievements in the field of chess. As you wrote, “links to three articles about Valeri Lilov's importance that have been published in newspapers” will suffice for this article to be kept, so here are those three links, all taken from leading Bulgarian newspapers, each with a big article about Valeri Lilov: (1) “24 Hours” Newspaper: http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.24chasa.bg%2FArticle.asp%3FArticleId%3D62347&sl=bg&tl=en (2) “Trud” Newspaper: http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.moreto.net%2Fnovini.php%3Fn%3D8926&sl=bg&tl=en (3) “Varna Sport” Newspaper: http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.varna-sport.com%2Findex.php%3Fpg%3Dnews1%26NewsID%3D1103822752%26NewsCat%3D6&sl=bg&tl=en. I have added all of them in the article, properly supporting important information about Valeri’s significant achievements as Bulgarian chess player. I believe, earning Varna Award (the official award of the second biggest city in Bulgaria), earning one-year scholarship by one of the leading Bulgarian newspapers “24 hours”, given personally by the president, and taking first place at the European School Chess Championship at the age of 10 do make people famous and not only regionally, but also internationally.

To further support the legit nobility of the subject of this article, I have provided a number of additional independent sources, citing various information about Valeri Lilov. Among the additional independent sources, cited in the present form of the article are The Official Bulgarian Correspondence Chess Website, The Official Website of Rakovski Middle School in Varna, and the completely unrelated to Valeri Lilov website www.BgSever.info.

You wrote that “if he hasn't been written about in any depth by any chess publication anywhere, he isn’t famous”. The fact is: he has been written about in considerable depth in many chess and non-chess publications. Should his Wikipedia Page be deleted? Can anyone help further improve this article, if anything else is needed in terms of formating, proper Wikipedia language, or anything else? I am looking forward to reading Wikipedia experts’ responses here! IvanSokolov (talk) 18:08, 25 July 2010 (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.