Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yaroslav Pavulyak


 * 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   no consensus. causa sui (talk) 16:44, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Yaroslav Pavulyak

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Delete as insufficiently notable. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 22:28, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 22:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 22:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 22:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: Fails WP:BIO (unless some refs can be found in Ukrainian). Unable to find independent WP:RS with no claims of notability as internet search did not turned up anything significant beyond passing mentions. If he was notable than there would at least be an obituary or something.--Michaela den (talk) 11:07, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 05:59, 8 October 2011 (UTC)




 * Delete fails WP:GNG, unless WP:RS can be found. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:35, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable. Besides getting degrees at important institutions, he seems to be known throughout Ukraine as a poet. For exmaple, he was featured in a radio show in 2009, and radio programs don't usually waste their time with people that their listeners wouldn't be a least remotely familiar with. Also, if you do a google search of his name in Ukrainian (Ярослав Павуляк) generates 3,440 hits . Considering Ukraine has not nearly as much internet users as the English language, this is a decently high number.--BoguSlav 06:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:28, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Satisfies WP:GNG. SimpsonDG (talk) 01:21, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * How? References from Reliable Sources? First Light (talk) 01:33, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Not a single reference in the article, except a couple of links to the subject's own website. One single book reference pops up from a Google Books search (something about him being expelled from a university), but nothing that would show even the slightest notability by the standards of WP:GNG. First Light (talk) 01:33, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The link I posted does not include any wikipedia mirrors, as I specifically specified those conditions when I made the search: I suggest I look at previous comments and research before making your own.--BoguSlav 00:51, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * By "reference", I actually meant Reliable Sources, by the standards used here on English Wikipedia. That means neutral third-party published sources, such as books by notable publishers, academic publishers preferred, or mainstream newspapers and peer-reviewed journals. I should have been more clear. Also see WP:GNG to learn about notability requirements here. First Light (talk) 01:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm familiar with notability requirements. My point is, Google Books and other such outlets you would usually check are not nearly as widespread in Ukraine as they are in the English-speaking world. So, just because you haven't found an academic English sourcce, doesn't mean anything. Excuse me if English academics don't usually analyze Ukrainian poets. I already mentioned the radio station he visited above, here is a Ukrainian language diploma thesis about his work that someone posted online , an obituary on a Ternopil Oblast news website in Russian, here is an article in a famous Russian-language news website about the nominees for the Shevchenko Prize in 2010 , not to mention the many blogs and editorials that have written about him: , , , . Unfortunately, none of these are in English. Hmmmm... I guess he really ISN'T notable.--BoguSlav 04:58, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, I failed to find any third party references on the net, anything I found was a mirror of Wikipedia. Point me to some appropriate references and I'll be happy to change this. -- Matthew Thompson talk to me bro! 01:50, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Similar to several comments above, I also have been unable to locate significant independent reliable source coverage, but do not speak Ukrainian so there may be some sources there, which if provided I will be happy to consider. Barring those, he appears to fail WP:CREATIVE as I can find no evidence that he is regarded as an important figure, is widely cited by peers or successors, is known for originating a significant new concept, that he has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent articles or reviews, or has received significant critical attention, held a significant exhibition, or is represented in the permanent collection of several notable museums. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:49, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep (and most emphatically at that). For starters, this report from SME (newspaper) surely counts as significant independent coverage! It does of course help to bear in mind that Jaroslav and Pavuliak are also common Romanizations of his names. Given people's declared readiness to accept sources when provided, I hope this will satisfy all doubters? --Andreas Philopater (talk) 12:09, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Or indeed Iaroslav Pavuliak. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 12:09, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I accept ref. 5 above as a satisfactory source for notability, along with the others.  DGG ( talk ) 00:27, 24 October 2011 (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.