Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vladimir Petrovich Trubetskoy

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep, no consensus. Dmcdevit·t 05:30, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Vladimir Petrovich Trubetskoy
Delete (see below): Can not verify; there's one page on the net with this person's name on it. Furthermore, the university's directory does not seem to think this person works there. Also, the article contains virtually no content except links to other future articles. Lastly, appears to fail WP:BIO. --Durin 15:28, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Also note that an earlier version of the article contained text copy/pasted from another website, and the article was copyvio'd. Then the contributor removed the text, leaving it as it now stands and removing the copyvio notice. --Durin 15:33, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Uhg. This is a mess (or not?). Have a look at Troubetzkoy. Try going to any of the articles listed under the generation sections, such as Iwan Symeonowicz Trubczewski, Roman Trubczewski, and Jerzy Trubczewski. These various articles are similar to the article I've listed here for VfD. The articles contain virtually nothing but a single line indicating they are/were a prince, and a bunch of links to indicate where in the genealogical tree they lie. One, possibly more, of these people have something of interest about them in the article: Sergei Petrovich Troubetzkoy for example. Most have virtually nothing. Looking under WP:NOT, specifically Genealogical entries, it seems like this whole set of articles might be candidates for deletion. The only thing that might separate it is the fact these are nobles. Perhaps all of the articles on these nobles that lack information should be merged into the parent article on this family, noted at the beginning of this comment. Most of these articles seem to fail WP:BIO (granted, that is a guideline, not a policy). I'd like some input here. --Durin 16:04, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd say put them all together and let's zap 'em all at once; the Troubetzkoy article justifies an article for Dmitry Timofeievich Troubetzkoy, but not IMO for anyone else mentioned there ... and certainly not for every damn member of the family unto the 21st generation! Lordy!  Delete this one, anyway.  Dcarrano
 * Delete nn vanity and genealogy. --Etacar11 01:10, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll change that to a weak keep as per below. Article could do with expansion to show why he is a notable member of the family.  --Etacar11 16:27, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable vanity. JamesBurns 06:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 'Delete Vladimir Petrovich as nonnotable, but let's not be so hasty as Dcarrano suggests in deleting them all. Nikolai Sergeyevich, for example, was an extremely important linguist in the Prague School; he was the first to identify the phoneme. --Angr/undefined 06:59, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Don't be so hasty. Is there any point in trying a rewrite at this stage? Wladimir Troubetzkoy (which is the spelling you have to search for) can certainly be found in the directory of the University of Versailles. He is author of several books in the field of comparative literature, co-editor of a handbook and editor of a congress volume. He has also translated and edited classical Russian authors like Pushkin and Dostoyevsky. See his entry at the catalogue of the Bibliothèque nationale de France I have also found a couple of articles by him referenced in different places. There are probably more of the latter, although that is more difficult to locate in a hurry. Sportspeople, cartoon artists and heavy metal guitarists are kept for fewer accomplishments than this. There are, unsurprisingly, several other members of this family who are notable in some way, such as for instance the sculptor Paolo Troubetzkoy. I'd bet anyone versed in Russian history could identify a couple of dozen more. Uppland 15:09, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll change my vote to Keep for this article, but still believe the entire line needs to be reviewed. Are there people in their genealogical tree worth having articles on? Absolutely. I said as much above, and still feel the same. However, I do not want to withdraw this VfD as I do think we need to rethink the various articles on members of this family who are flatly unremarkable. WP:NOT does offer some direction, as I noted above. What I am unclear on is whether there is any meta page dealing with the status of nobles, and whether just being a noble is enough to readily grant inclusion. Too many of these articles are simple one-liners, with a host of links to other people in the family tree. Can they be expanded? Maybe, but for many probably not. In the meantime I think they should be merged into the parent article. Thanks for finding the more common spelling of this individual's name Uppland! --Durin 16:07, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I think one problem is that these silly nobility categories and nobility stubs remove the focus from the individual accomplishments of people to the genealogy. The should really never be used unless there is some other stub-type on the person first. Uppland 16:55, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I rewrote the article, but my French is rusty, to say the least, and I would be very grateful if somebody would take a look at it. I'm sure it can be improved. Uppland
 * 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.