Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Viorel Chivriga


 * 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. Delete both. Discussion centered around notability under WP:BASIC, WP:PROF, WP:POLITICIAN. No claims which would support the latter two notability bars were asserted, and sources provided did not, and were generally not perceived to, rise to BASIC/GNG. j⚛e deckertalk 15:48, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Viorel Chivriga

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Both Chivriga and Ciobanu are pretty minor actors on the Moldovan political scene: supporting players in the PAD, which is essentially a one-man show run by Mihai Godea. Godea himself is notable, but these two are not. They haven't held any sort of elected office (WP:POLITICIAN criterion 1). As for the second criterion, I'd venture to say they haven't really garnered significant press attention, even at the level of Moldova. For Chivriga, the sources presented are basically irrelevant: a CV, a blurb, that sort of thing. For Ciobanu, the coverage is even more trivial. In actual Moldovan newspapers, coverage is essentially trivial. Oh, and one other thing: the articles were started by a single-purpose account, strongly hinting they're promotional. - Biruitorul Talk 17:10, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related page:
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 12:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Moldova-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 12:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 12:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 12:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 12:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * KEEP! I acknowledge that I wrote the article so maybe you can consider me biased, your choice. These two articles are my first ones on Wikipedia. Instead of criticizing the triviality of Moldavian press, you can help me edit these two articles so it can bring something to the community and to the people who are searching for trustful information.
 * I will start defending the articles by pointing out three main arguments:
 * 1) It is not you who can say that PAD is a one man show on the Moldavian political arena. By stating this phrase,Biruitorul, you showed your biased inclination to comment on the political and social events in Moldova. Right, it is a party in its begging, but if you try to google, Viorel Chivriga, for instance, you will see that there are at least 20 google pages with him mentioned in the articles. It is a huge media coverage on this personality.
 * 2) I understood that the citations should be more explicit and correct. That's way, I improved it by adding new precise links where did I get the information from.
 * 3) It's mentioned the missing of published books, articles on JSTOR, papers in world known scientific journals, as an argument for deletion of this article. It is right that the Moldovan scientific community is not so much in touch with the world's cp rights trends, but it doesn't meant that the papers written in Moldova are not scientifically authentic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domain Flag (talk • contribs) 00:59, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile, in polls taken in the real world (p. 44), the PAD is lumped in at the 2% of Moldovans who say they'll vote for "other parties" &mdash; never a good sign. Godea is the main player, the only elected official (albeit elected for another party) and the only relevant member, even if there are a few hundred hangers-on around him. Yes, I'm sorry to say, it's a one-man show around him, objectively speaking.
 * Rest assured, I am not criticizing the Moldovan press. I am simply pointing out that these two barely receive any coverage there, which is a sign they lack notability. I'm not expecting the British or the German or the American press to cover them, but if they're ignored even in their own country...
 * If Chivriga is notable as an economist, we need to see how he passes WP:PROF. It's not necessary that he be world renowned, just that some evidence of an impact on his discipline be showed, even within Moldova.
 * And if the two are notable as politicians, let's have some evidence that either of them passes WP:POLITICIAN. I'm not really seeing it at this point. - Biruitorul Talk 22:09, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete the bunch The PAD is not an objectionable political force, but it is a terribly minor one in a rather small country; one would expect entries on its individual members (Vice President included) to be based on something more than their membership to that party. These articles do not meet WP:POLITICIAN, and they don't seem to meet WP:PROF or any other policy in compensation; at the moment, they just look like PAD soapboxing. Dahn (talk) 15:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:41, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → B  music  ian  02:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -Scottywong | confer _ 23:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, I agree with nom.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete both: No evidence proffered that either meet the GNG. One would think that if, for instance, Chivriga has had over 300 press interviews, as the article alleges, which discuss the subject in the significant detail the GNG requires, that the article creator could source just two of them.  Failing that, articles cannot be sustained.   Ravenswing   19:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Ciobanu as she definitely fails WP:GNG. Weak keep for Chivigra. I can find two sources that would probably be reliable:
 * This one which is included in the article
 * This one, which can only be read in full by paying members of the site, but it's an article on a reliable news site and it's apparently authored by him. Not necessarily a source about him, but on balance I think he may just be notable. Basa lisk  inspect damage⁄berate 14:18, 18 June 2012 (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.