Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vanja Bulić


 * 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The result was speedy close, withdrawn by nominator. On the basis of the last three keep votes, I am going to go ahead and withdraw and close this. Note to QuackDoctor, had you offered a reasonable keep rationale, rather than personally attacking me from the the start, I might have been willing to withdraw this earlier. Take this as a lesson in civility. Non-admin closure. Safiel (talk) 21:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Vanja Bulić

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be a non notable journalist. Only source given is a brief biographical blurb. Safiel (talk) 21:08, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep This journalist is quite notable in Serbia. He was chief editor of journal Duga (magazine), he wrote scenarios for several Yugoslav movies, and was one of the most well known TV anchors in Serbia. Moreover, he wrote several books. He has article on Serbian wikipedia, for several years by now. He frequently appears on state TV, and was most famous for bringing underworld characters to the TV interviewing him in the same style like academics, who were also his guests. Why this stub is suggested for deletion by people who know nothing of the local culture, is quite strange. As for sources, many can be found by google search alone (and if you dont understand Serbian, there is google translate, so that is not an excuse): Interview in Politika (most respected daily in Serbia), other results from many magazines, , imdb page: , numerous books (see serbian page for the list) etc. Seems that proposer of this deletion, either knows not a thing about Serbia, and is possibly malicious as he didn't preform google check himself. QuackDoctor (talk) 21:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment The proceeding temper tantrum and unsubstantiated claims against myself tend to give the impression of a WP:COI or possibly even a WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. This nomination will go the entire week and the community, not YOU, will decide whether it is ultimately deleted or kept. This is a good faith nomination and I suggest you calm down and focus on proper arguments, not attacking the nominator. Safiel (talk) 22:35, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Luckily not YOU will decide either. Nor will your ad hominem attacks prevent community (that has numerous Serbian editors too) to figure out the truth, which is clearly beyound YOUR means to understand - you cant see pass your petty deletionist agenda. QuackDoctor (talk) 23:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment The malitious removal of this notable journalist by the proposer, as well as the unfounded accusations, suggest WP:COI on his part. As anyone can check the references, the person (Bulic) is notable. The person has nothing to do with me. In fact, the editor who started the article is not me either, but a new editor brought by me (also unrelated to the subject matter) who was experimenting and tried to write an article about a well known person (mostly the first one that came to his mind, but was surprised that had no article here). His attempt was met with instant deletionism. If you keep welcoming new user attempts of creating new content in this hostile and hysterical way, and propose deletions without even TRYING to understand the local content, and moreover show such racist contempt of Serbian people (regional notability IS relevant notability in the case of major national journalists) or any other non-english speaking people, you are going to have a lot of trouble in expanding editor base, as crisis of new editors exists precisely because of the bullying like the one shown by deletionist troll Safiel; this problem was written about in journals like MIT Technology review several times, and I am sure many people here know about it. Agressive, brainless (without checking the references) deletionsim of superficial people like Safiel, is destructive in many ways; as is turning away new contributors - someone says to his friend, come and edit wikipedia, it is nice and easy, and instead of being thanked for bringing in new editors one gets accused of personal interest. My only interest here is to fight profound idiotism of people who damage this project by turning away new contributors with perfectly valid contributions, because they are too lazy (or too stupid, or both) to figure out if something is relevant or not. QuackDoctor (talk) 22:52, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Notability in Serbia or even the Serbian speaking world does not necessarily equate to notability for the English Wikipedia. He may ultimately be determined to be notable, but it will be by the English Wikipedia's guidelines, not the Serbian Wikipedia's guidelines. Safiel (talk) 22:37, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * There are clear criteria for notability, and this person meets them all. Far less well known and notable people have articles here, and still meet the criteria. Why dont you CHECK the references, instead of talking nonsense. QuackDoctor (talk) 22:52, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete I checked the references, and none signify notability and two are to non-English sites. A quick Google search shows noting in English and nothing to signify notability. Also could be a possible BLP violation as it does not link to any trustworthy sources. TheMesquito (talk) 23:31, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * How are imdb, or major Serbian news sites like daily Politika or B92 not trustworthy? Sources do not have to be in English; the Serbian sources all confirm his notability. QuackDoctor (talk)


 * Redirect to Pretty Village, Pretty Flame. This movie looks to be the writer's most known work, not notable enough for a stand alone article though per WP:INHERITED - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:57, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * That is not true, I didn't even know about his role as screenwriter in this movie and I am from Serbia (movie is known to all ex-Yugoslavia people though), until the person who created this article found his name to put a red link to on that movie page, he was aware of that fact. He is best known for as TV presenter for Crni Biseri (which should have a page too, but I guess many would delete it too, ruining the some of the very best things about wikipedia, that is making local information acessible in english (supported by sources which are in this case also easy to find). Crni Biseri was a major thing in Serbia in the 90s - popular show that CHANGED Serbia (to the worse); also, he was very notable as chief editor of important Duga magazine. Nowadays, he writes books that sell good in Serbia (bestselling author of popular books). But you wouldn't know that if you are not Serbian speaking (since noone wrote a wikipedia article yet). Just wait for other Serbian editors with local knowledge to explain the relevant context for you (since you don't believe me here and have no time to go over the google translated Serbian articles which are plentiful. QuackDoctor (talk) 00:19, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Do you have some reliable Serbian sources then? The article needs more coverage, IMDB is only good if portions created by staff writers are used for example. (Citing IMDb) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:23, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Do I have to do all the work? There are other Serbian editors who might do this. Someone starts an article, others extend it. That is how it should work here, but if you instantly delete a stub, and turn away new people that I tried to bring here, you are doing real damage. If I was annoyed here, it is because of the unnecessarily paranoid deletionist attitude that is demonstrated here. If this comes to attention of other Serbian editors (I have asked them to contribute at relevant project page), as I hope it will in the next few days, you will see. But I guess even page on Serbian wiki did not have much work done. And if you turn away new contributors it will stay that way. Is that what you want? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.198.252.43 (talk) 00:44, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Here on Wikipedia the editors here try to create a non hostile environment the remarks made by you were insulting right off of the top, do you see any other editors doing this? I may disagree with someone else but I don't lunge forward with words but state my opinion on why I feel they are wrong in context of the subject not the person. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:48, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It is very hostile to try to delete the article the very moment it was created. The person who created the article (as a way to come to wikipedia, and at MY invitation) was disgusted by this, and told me "I don't want to do this, this is not worth my time". That is the kind of environment you are presenting to new users. I am simply reacting to that. QuackDoctor (talk) 00:53, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I am going to continue this convo at WP:ANI this way it is in one place. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:54, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 30 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Someone who's occupied these positions is definitely going to get substantial coverage in major sources, and when you're prominent in the 1990s in Eastern Europe, that coverage is going to be overwhelmingly in non-English print sources.  The WP:GHITS page is somewhat relevant; in this situation, we can't judge notability purely on the lack of reliable English-language sources available through Google.  Nyttend (talk) 04:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. What a failure of WP:BEFORE. I'm not interested in expanding the article, but the man has 80 hits only on the website of the national TV; 417 in one major newspaper Blic, and 94 in another Politika; take away 50% on Google's miscounting, and that's still plenty. Wikipedia is global English-language encyclopedia, not encyclopedia of English-speaking world, and WP:N and WP:V do not require that notability and sources must be in English. No such user (talk) 12:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. As said above, Wikipedia is NOT an encyclopedia of only the English-speaking world. If there were zero zip nada zilch references to this individual in English-language publications, that would not matter even a tiny fraction of an iota. Original English references are better, yes, but they are not strictly necessary, especially with respect to someone in the entertainment world (defined broadly) which is so heavily language-dependent. --NellieBly (talk) 14:38, 30 April 2014 (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.