Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zajdi, zajdi, jasno sonce


 * 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 speedy keep, no argument for deletion given, original afd tagging by anon edit-warrior clearly made in bad faith. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Zajdi, zajdi, jasno sonce

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

In my opinion, this AFD is part of an on-going edit war between an anon with a floating IP and other users. (The edit summary of an editor removing the AFD reads, "someone needs to study the correlation between vandalism and ethnicity.") I got dragged into this mess declining a speedy deletion added by the anon. He'd also added an AFD tag but failed to complete the discussion subpage and list the AFD. I removed both. He re-added both with an admonition to not remove deletion tags. I left a testy edit summary suggesting he complete the process and again declined the speedy. Another editor removed the AFD tag. The anonymous editor reverted but again did not complete the process. Pro forma nom, as I can't leave this hanging in Limbo any longer. See my "keep" below. Dloh cierekim  14:14, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dzied. Should have crossed this particular "t". I guess I have to speak for the anon who started this. I'll assume good faith and say the anon feels the subject is not notable in that it lacks sufficient coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. That the subject lacks inherent notability. That the sources I listed are deficient. As pointed out below, he could not complete the process, and may not have realized that he was not finished. Unfortunately, I've not been able to establish a meaningful dialogue.   Dloh  cierekim  16:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, if an anon refuses to talk, a proper solution IMO is to protect the article from anonymous (since the IP is floating and it cannot be blocked for disruption), rather than to drag other people into wasting their time. Dzied Bulbash (talk) 17:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Constructive edits are being made by anons. I'm assuming good faith because there may be some language barrier there. ACheers,  Dloh  cierekim  17:12, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Editors without accounts cannot complete the AFD process, because they are prohibited from creating new pages in the Wikipedia: namespace. It probably wasn't the best approach to demand that someone complete a process that they are barred from completing.  Uncle G (talk) 15:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The editor certainly could have asked for help or discussed on talk page, rather than edit warring, as the page history hows him doing. As it went 24 hours without any progress, I went ahead and completed the process. Cheers, and happy editing.    Dloh  cierekim  15:51, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Folk songs are probably inherently notable from the start because of their long-term cultural impact. The sort of thing a not-paper resource should include. (If we were talkin' about "mah noble Stewball," I'd know I was on terra firma. ) In attempting to source this, I've been limited by not only language barriers, but by alphabet barriers as well. However, I was able to find a number of mentions on the Internet. The Balkans is a region with a large number of languages, so there may be references I have missed. Hopefully, someone can help me out with the sourcing. So far, the editors of the article have not.
 * Appears notable--
 * Google scholar hit in English.
 * Google scholar hit in Cyrillic. (Not my mother tongue.)
 * Wikipedia article in Cyrillic (Macedonian?-- not my mother tongue.)
 * Galenet mention
 * Other potential sourcing--
 * "Zajdi, zajdi, jasno sonce"
 * "Зајди, зајди, јасно сонце".
 * News article (in Macedonian) talking about the song and Aleksandar Sarievski. (cached).
 * 8 Google book hits in Bulgarian.
 * Google scholar hit in Bulgarian. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  14:14, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Found an alternate spelling link connecting this to the movie 300. See that article for a bit more. Dloh  cierekim  14:28, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bulgaria-related deletion discussions.   —Eastmain (talk) 14:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Macedonia-related deletion discussions.   —Eastmain (talk) 14:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.   —Eastmain (talk) 14:26, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep sufficient sourcing for notability. Classic folk songs are notable; well-known widespread modern adaptations may be--there is sufficient evidence to show that this one is. DGG (talk) 14:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * speedy keep. No arguments for deletion are presented. AfD is not a venue for wikipedia dispute resolution. Dzied Bulbash (talk) 16:29, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep--this is a fascinating article, and I hope some good (and objective) editing will be applied to it. Maybe a Russian can get in on the action? Drmies (talk) 02:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sadly, the edit warriors have not yet come here to say the article should be kept and why.  Dloh  cierekim  03:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Reverting POV vandalism is different to edit-warring. The only reason the vandal wanted the page deleted was because he wasn't happy that his vandalism was being dealt with (and therefore he couldn't express his POV).  Balkan Fever  09:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep--This is a most popular traditioanal and antologic macedonian song. --Raso mk (talk) 06:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC) P.S. The bulgarian POV in this article is needless. They have allready own song "Černej Goro"


 * 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.