Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoltan Feher (diplomat-scholar)


 * 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 delete. Discounting the sockpuppetry. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Zoltan Feher (diplomat-scholar)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable. Not a diplomat. Possibly an academic.  scope_creep Talk  15:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. Way WP:TOOSOON for WP:NPROF for this PhD student.  The best case for GNG notability is via the Daily Iowan (the student newspaper of the University of Iowa) and Diplomata sources, but I'm not seeing the former as significant coverage, and I'm uncertain of the independence of the latter.  The article has severe WP:PROMO issues, and overall I think the case for WP:TNT is stronger than that for GNG. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 14:16, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Pinging who dealt with drafts of the same article at AfC. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 14:51, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep article . Article is well-written and well-referenced. There are 16 sources on the page and 7 selected publications. Sources confirm notability, especially Washington Times and Daily Iowan.Jean-Michel Belmondo (talk) 14:41, 10 August 2020 (UTC) — Jean-Michel Belmondo (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Not they don't. The whole thing is crock, a lie. He is not a diplomat nor a scholar. The whole thing is fake.  scope_creep Talk  15:15, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The Washington Post reference is a passing mention, confirming that he was press secretary. Not a diplomat. The Daily Iowan is a passing mention as well. The pigeon gets more coverage, and even that paper confirms he was a press secretary, a low level position, and only because he was visiting the local library. Not a diplomat.    scope_creep Talk  15:19, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It is important that we examine the article and its references thoroughly, and with some knowledge about diplomacy. The subject of the article served as a professional diplomat for 12 years, as the references confirm. A press secretary at an embassy is a diplomatic function, filled by professional diplomats. I have re-read both news articles mentioned. Neither are passing mentions, just the contrary. Both The Daily Iowan article and the Washington Times article are solely dedicated to describing this person's diplomatic work and innovative approaches. The Washington Times article sites no less than the U.S. Secretary of Commerce to this end. On the page, there are 14 other sources and 7 publications to confirm that this person is notable as both a diplomat and an academic.Jean-Michel Belmondo (talk) 16:34, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We will go through the references, using the standard table.   scope_creep Talk  17:37, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Opinion struck as both Jean-Michel Belmondo and article creator Anita Hernandez-García have been confirmed as sockpuppets of Zoltanfeher


 *  Weak Delete for now in the absence of the history. The article is blatantly promotional, and the subject appears to have some success in churnalism and in making himself famous for being famous in a small way.  It appears that the subject and others are trying to use Wikipedia to promote the subject's career and views for some ulterior agenda.  The draft that I reviewed was deleted at the request of its author, and now a new article has been created.  Was the draft deleted in order to delete my comments?  I review a lot of drafts, and have requested that this draft be undeleted to my email, both for my comparison and to see what my comments were that evidently needed to be hidden.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - I have seen the deleted version. The deleted draft and this article are almost identical, and the draft is unmistakably an autobiography.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neither embassy press secretary nor doctoral students are likely levels of accomplishment for notability, and a brief puff piece in the Moonie Times isn't good enough to counter that. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - See Sockpuppet investigations/Zoltanfeher. That is, the article is an autobiography by a sockpuppeteer.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:27, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Puffery and self-promotion, with no actual evidence that any notability standard is met. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 22:21, 11 August 2020 (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.