Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuri Zhukov (historian)

Yuri Zhukov (historian)

Yuri Zhukov (historian) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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 • 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 • 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 • 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 • 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 • 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 ([1][2][3]), 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 Chris troutman}. 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)
• 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)

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)