Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agios Nikolaos of Angelokomis

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. Consensus exists that this article should not exist at this title in this form. Up to the punters more generally if some reference to this is included in one of the seemingly thousands of articles mentioned as possible targets below. Daniel (talk) 14:19, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agios Nikolaos of Angelokomis

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Recently created article on an alleged minor personality of late Byzantine / early Ottoman history, who has recently drawn some attention because a character based on him featured in a popular historical drama series on Turkish TV, but who almost certainly never existed.

According to some early Ottoman chronicles (which the article fails to cite, leaving its factual basis entirely vague), a person called "Aya Nikola" was a "tekfur", i.e. minor Byzantine official, in Inegöl, where he fought against Osman, the founder of the Ottoman dynasty, in the late 13th century. This would barely be enough to make him notable even if it was true. But as is explained in this scholarly treatment (which the article likewise fails to cite), this alleged personality is unlikely to have existed. In particular, this is because no Byzantine could possibly have born this name. "Aya" (rendered here as "agios", i.e. "saint") is supposed to be part of his name, not an actual saint's title. It is entirely impossible for a Byzantine Christian person to be so named (and needless to say, there is no actual saint of that name in the Orthodox church either, apart from the real St Nicholas). As the article cited above demonstrates, "Agios Nikolaos" was almost certainly not the name of any person at that time and place, but simply the local Greek place name of Inegöl itself. The Ottoman chronicles (the earliest of which was written 2 centuries after the events in question) simply got these mixed up. The identification of Inegöl with a place called "Agios Nikolaos" is also independently confirmed here [1].

Apart from the medieval chronicles that invented him, and recent popular reflections based on the TV series, the alleged "Aya Nikola" gets mentioned in a handful of modern Turkish works. I haven't found a single non-Turkish source that takes any note of him. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As far as I know we've had a few discussions about fictional characters in Turkish series: they all ended up being deleted. The Dutch page is nominated for deletion too. Obviously these 2 are not reasons for deletion. There are a few Turkish sources mentioning that he fought against Osman in Domanic Battle (couldn't find an English translation for it, so I guess I made my own), like this, but as said by the nominator fighting in a battle alone is not enough for notability. Hürriyet says that he was an important person for the Orthodox people and that there are churches made that have his name. Not confirmed, but I think one of them is Aya Nikola Kilisesi in Istanbul [tr], which makes me think its not a WP:HOAX. There are a few books citing him: this, this and this and there are plenty more. All of them mention roughly the same: his role the Domanic Battle. I don't know what Sabah and Hürriyet base their claims on. I haven't quite looked at the notability guidelines for historical people yet, so I'm only commenting. ~Styyx ^{Talk? ^-^} 08:53, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The claim about the churches is obvious nonsense: there are of course thousands of churches and places called "Aya Nikola" ("Agios Nikolaos"), but each and every one of them is named after the real St Nicholas of Myra – just like the village this guy supposedly administered. The fact that Hurriyet mixes those up just goes to demonstrate they have no idea what they're talking about. Same goes for all the other Turkish newspapers parroting each other in running these kinds of articles about those TV characters and their alleged historical background. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:11, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I was thinking that too. The books all say about the same: Tekfur of İnegöl, worked together with the Tekfur of Bilecik to fight Osman (a bit more detailed). Let's assume that the sources are true and that he existed. I don't think that the battle would make him notable enough for an article. I think I will go with Delete. If someone finds something else, I would be happy to hear it. ~Styyx ^{Talk? ^-^} 09:47, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we know in what sense he "existed": Those medieval Ottoman chronicles do mention him, and all those things the Turkish books reiterate are basically just what's in there. We can of course assume that there would have been some "tekfur" in Inegöl and that Osman fought against him; it's just that we don't know his name. Some Ottoman scribe at some point confused a phrase that meant "the tekfur of Agios Nikolaos" with "the tekfur Agios Nikolaos"; simple as that (cf p.34 here). Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:15, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On which page of the the Dergipark source is it stated that he doesn't exist? Its 300+ pages. ~Styyx ^{Talk? ^-^} 13:18, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pages 17-35, the article "İnegöl Adının Menşei Üzerine" by Muhammet Tarakçı. In his summary section on p.34 he says "İnegöl tekfurunun adının Aya Nikola olamayacağı ve Âşıkpaşazâde’nin verdiği bilgide bir yanlışlık olduğu ortaya çıkmaktadır" ('we can conclude that the tekfur of Inegöl cannot have been called Aya Nikola and that the information given by Aşıkpaşazâde is erroneous') The details of the argument are on the pages leading up to p.30, which concludes in the statement "Aya Nikola’nın tekfurun değil de, İnegöl şehrinin ismi olması" ("that 'Aya Nikola' wasn't the name of the tekfur, but the name of the town of Inegöl"). Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Found it. Crucially it also says that older sources from the 13th and 14th century don't mention his name but rather say "Tekfur of Inegöl". I'll let the people in the Dutch AfD know. ~Styyx ^{Talk? ^-^} 14:38, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve As we all know, he is mentioned in a lot of books about his role in the battles, maybe we can add a biography section explaining them? Turkish news sources can be used alongside the books. Limorina (talk) 12:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
- The Turkish news sources are all rubbish, as demonstrated above. Journalists aren't reliable sources about medieval history. And the two or three books are merely uncritically rehashing the story from the old chroniles, without ever critically reflecting their reliability or documenting its factual basis and sources. The only reliable source dealing with him I've seen so far is the one that says he didn't exist. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:48, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what about this (you may need to scroll down) I found on İslâm Ansiklopedisi? It doesn't mention his name but it talks about the tekfurs of Inegöl and Bilecik and the battles. Limorina (talk) 12:03, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thats the point. Tekfur of Inegöl existed, but we are not sure if it was Aya Nikola. ~Styyx ^{Talk? ^-^} 12:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep -- Agios means holy, which is the equivalent of saint (from Latin for holy). Tekfur is apparently "governor". I see this person (if not a hoax) as potentially notable, but we need much better sources. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- But that's the whole point: this person wasn't a saint. If there had been a person considered a saint at that time and place, Byzantine Christian sources would have been written about him. No person in the Orthodox church could possibly become a saint without massive amounts of writing about him in church sources. The Turkish chronicles weren't claiming he was a saint either. They were calling him "aya" as if that was simply part of his name. Which is plainly impossible, as anybody with just the faintest idea about Byzantine culture knows – people simply weren't named like that. It is entirely impossible for a person walking around at that time and place and being called "Aya Nikola" or anything remotely similar to that. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:07, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that some people at that time, possibly the people living in İnegöl, called him "Aya" because they liked him as a Tekfur? I have a feeling (no source) that his actual name was just Nikola. My argument is pretty weak but I agree that he sounds like a notable person. Limorina (talk) 21:13, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not possible that people were just calling him "Agios" locally. That's not how "sainthood" works in Christianity. You only become a "saint" after your death, for starters. And if he was actually a notable figure, for his military or political role or any other reason, we'd know about him from Byzantine sources. For one thing, we would know what his actual title and rank was. Keep in mind there was no such job as "tekfur" in reality; it's merely an exonym, the Turkish word for a local official whose actual rank and function in the Byzantine administration the Turks couldn't bother to remember. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:06, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment what about keeping the article title but changing the content to reflect the points made in this discussion, so that the (presumably numerous) people wanting to know something about him after watching the tv series can learn that there was no such person? Mccapra (talk) 05:33, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- But there was a Tekfur of Inegöl (as per İslâm Ansiklopedisi), it's disputed whether he was called Aya Nikola. Are you suggesting that there be an article about the Tekfur of Inegöl or an article about the fictional character? I don't quite understand what you mean? Limorina (talk) 11:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - There was a tekfur of Inegöl? Yes, maybe, except that we don't know anything about him. Even in the Ottoman chronicles and in the modern works based on them, like the account in Islam Ansiklopedisi you linked to, nothing is said about him except that he was opposed to Osman. He is always mentioned together with other "tekfur"s, of Karacahisar, Bilecik and so on. None of them stands out among the others in any way that would make them notable. They were just minor Byzantine military officers. We don't know their names (the only thing we know is that this one most certainly was not called "Aya Nikola"); we don't know their titles and offices (we only know it most certainly wasn't "tekfur"), we don't know when they were born and died, we don't know what they did. Heck, we don't even know for certain what the place he commanded was called in his time (it was most certainly not "Angelokomis"; that isn't even correct Greek.) Nothing, nada. Nobody would ever dream of writing an article about any of them, if it hadn't been for that TV series. The article we could write about him would have exactly one sentence: There once was some guy who was the Byzantine Greek commander of an insignificant village that is now Inegöl. The End. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:12, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs more input by Byzantinists...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:13, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The subject obviously fails to meet the WP:Notability criteria. Nobody seems to be able to expand the article to a suiable length. The name of the article can be made a redirect to somewhere else like İnegöl. That article can mention the subject of this article and give to interested readers that little info avaiable. A note in the end: @Peterkingiron: re what you said that I see this person (if not a hoax) as potentially notable, I think that rules say that if the notability is not clearly established, the article does not have a good reason to stay. Of course, if later someone is able to write a decent article, they are welcome to do so. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 18:06, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If there is insufficient evidence in academic lit in history and elsewhere as relevant, then we cannot be sure we are not popularizing a hoax. Should veritable sources arise that would validate this article's contents, that would change things, but we can't idly let ourselves present what is likely disinformation because there is some small chance it *could* be legit -- burden of proof and all.--Calthinus (talk) 18:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: What if this article is reworked into an article about the Battle of Domaniç or the Battle of Mount Armenia? Limorina (talk) 12:32, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The "Battle of Mount Armenia" was an "insignificant local skirmish", according to the Islam Ensiklopedisi article you cited earlier, so probably not a proper topic for an article. The other battle might be worth a stub, but hardly anything is known about the role of this "tekfur of Inegöl" in it, and in any case there's too little of value in the present article to make preservation of the edit history desirable. There's also no value in preserving a redirect from this specific article title, as it's not a plausible search term – no source, even among those that assume his existence, has ever actually called this guy "Agios Nikolaos", and certainly not "Agios Nikolaos of Angelokomis". Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, since obviously no person with such a name existed, as Fut. Perf. has shown (and as any Greek-speaker would tell you). However, the information about Ashikpashazade reporting a tekfur of that name, and why this is incorrect, should be added in the İnegöl article, precisely to combat this misinformation that is apparently widespread in Turkey. Constantine ✍ 14:14, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per above. There is no reason to work this into something else, if someone thinks another topic is notable and some sources here would help create an article, they should create it, not rework content here. The article history here would be unneeded baggage and reworking would take more effort than starting fresh. // Timothy :: t | c | a 04:17, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.