Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuri Zhukov (historian)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) -- Dane 2007  talk 02:13, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Yuri Zhukov (historian)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lack of notability. While one can find a couple publications about this person, this is insufficient to establish notability. My very best wishes (talk) 21:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 14:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 14:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 14:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 14:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 14:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Userfy I'm a big proponent of WP:REALPROBLEM. I'd like to have the closer move this wreck into my userspace where I can work on it on my own time. I'm pretty sure Zhukov is notable but this shouldn't stay in wiki as-is and I can't commit to fixing it immediately. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 19:38, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Userfy or weak keep. He does seem to be known, even in English-language sources, as a Stalin apologist; I just added some sources to the article saying so: Special:Diff/737585109. I think, on that basis, he may well pass WP:GNG, but troutman's offer to userfy and clean it up seems a good one to me. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:02, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. The references David just added, and а few more from ru-wiki, suggest he appears in the press enough to satisify the GNG (albeit for dubious reasons). I don't see anything in the article problematic enough to justify risking it getting lost in userspace (with all due respect to }. Joe Roe (talk) 21:59, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete (as a nominator) per WP:GNG - I do not think that mentioning him in a few sources can be described as significant coverage. My very best wishes (talk) 22:24, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note that as nominator you have already been presumed to favour deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:59, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Not at all. I would easily switch to "keep" if others convinced me that the page should be kept. Actually, I even included a couple of Russian language sources about the person during this AfD, which is an argument in favor of his notability and works against me. But the page still looks like WP:Promotion for someone familiar with the subject (note that he is proud to be a Stalinist and to be described as such). Actually, I think this page was created by Zhukov himself or by someone close to him, but digging this out would be waste of time. My very best wishes (talk) 17:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Struck duplicate !vote from nominator; the nomination is considered as your !vote. However, feel free to comment all you'd like. North America1000 01:33, 10 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep at worst userify: what he has produced is a very substantial body of work. Of course I have no means of judging its merits.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:33, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I assume you read his books? A substantial body of work? Do you mean his "Handbook of Stalinist"? My very best wishes (talk) 02:48, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment Article creator blanked most of the text of the article, which I have now reverted. While it could be interpreted as a request for deletion by author, it looks more like sour grapes, so I will not move for CSD G7 and instead let this AfD continue on to conclusion. Richarddev (talk) 19:41, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Richarddev has left this identical comment in multiple irrelevant AfDs. There are no reversions of page-blanking in his recent contributions. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:55, 4 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep -- somewhat noted as a Stalin apologist. I believe that the improved article can be kept. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:41, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable as a Stalin apologist, has enough sources to pass GNG. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs )~ 16:35, 6 September 2016 (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.