Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vladimir Narbut


 * 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 keep. --Bongwarrior (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Vladimir Narbut

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No assertion of notability. 5 English ghits, none notable. Somewhat more in Russian, but none appear to be substantive. Doesn't appear to be notable enough for coverage in the English Wikipedia, however it's possible that there is notable information in the Russian Wikipedia article. Travellingcari (talk) 16:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep Clearly a notable poet (Acmeism was a major movement in Russian poetry). He has a biography in Russian here plus an article on Wikipedia.ru. Incidentally, "Vladimir Narbut" brings considerably more than 5 Google hits. --Folantin (talk) 17:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I admit I may have used the wrong google search. I'm not disputing the Russian sources since I can't read them well enough, do you think there's enough English coverage to warrant an article in the English Wiki or should he be mentioned in the context of acmeism? I didn't see the English articles being substantive enough to support an article, but I admit it could have been a bad call on my part. Let's see what others think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Travellingcari (talk • contribs) 17:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep Notable poet. There was an article about him in "Literature Encyclopedia of 1929-1939" (see an article about this book on ru:Литературная энциклопедия 1929—1939). Speaking about English articles, they are not online, but you can find references to several of them here. Mserge (talk) 18:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Another comment: the question I have from the linked Michigan page is that searching on one of the books mentioned doesn't make it clear whether those are indeed English books or if the Michigan page simply names the translation of the Russian title. As I said above and below to Folantin, I'm not debating his notability in Russian (and the Russian wikipedia), I just question whether there is enough in English to include him here. If so, how can the article be improved? Travellingcari (talk) 18:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply to nominator: Well, coverage in the English wiki doesn't depend on the number of English-language sources available but, judging by a Google Books search, even on those grounds he's due an article. For example, he has an entry in Victor Terras' Handbook of Russian Literature (not accessible online). The major problem with the English Wikipedia article (which I suspect is what prompted you to put it up for deletion) is that it's a stub the original author seems to have abandoned before he or she got round to any significant events in Narbut's career. For example, one thing you wouldn't learn from our page is that Narbut was killed in a Soviet prison camp. That's quite a big omission! --Folantin (talk) 18:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply fair enough. I agree on your assessment re: an abandoned stub and the sources initially found seemed to repeat the one line about him being important in acmeism and his dates of birth/death. Perhaps a lack of English information is what led the stub author to abandon the stub. So I guess the guestion is then how can we improve the article to make it worthy of inclusion? I'm not familiar enough with Narbut or his work, nor competent enough in Russian to know how much can be expanded upon. Travellingcari (talk) 18:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Maybe I'll try to provide a brief outline of his life and works using Russian sources some time this week. Incidentally, as I've said, notability on English Wikipedia is not dependent on the availability of English-language sources on the Net. We're supposed to see things from a global perspective. --Folantin (talk) 18:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree on the global perspective but if a subject isn't covered substantially in English, what's the likelihood that someone is going to look to the English wikipedia for information on the subject? I'm not disagreeing that this stub maybe has potential at some point in the future but I don't agree that the article as it stands warrants a speedy keep. That's just my opinion on the issue and I've enjoyed this discussion. Travellingcari (talk) 19:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply I'm afraid none of what you say in the above comment is a valid ground for deletion per our policies. Thanks. --Folantin (talk) 19:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep Clearly a notable poet - Vald (talk) 18:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep as per everyone who voted that above. Editorofthewiki (talk) 19:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I've expanded the article using an online Russian source. Ideally, somebody should doublecheck my version to see if I've got the details right. I'm tired and my Russian is a little rusty. --Folantin (talk) 20:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of author-related deletions.  --Lquilter (talk) 01:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep I added a reference to Teras's Handbook of Russian Literature (Yale University Press), a basic source in English, where there's a short but detailed article on this notable and interesting figure. It gives a different death date (November 15 1944) than the one in the current version--maybe somebody knows which is right?--Wageless (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment According to this site the 1944 date is falsified and 1938 is correct. Maybe Terras was published before the opening of the Soviet archives? There's also some disagreement over the cause of his death as the source linked claims he drowned. --Folantin (talk) 08:44, 30 January 2008 (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.