Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anton Tanonov

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. Davewild (talk) 07:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anton Tanonov

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

Nonnotable beginner Russian composer. Article single source is autobiography -dash- promo at a strange website. The text contains a falsehood: Nikolai Gogol does not have a work "Khalyava". (Although it is a name of an episodic character in Viy). That casts doubts in its reliability. -M.Altenmann >t 02:51, 1 June 2015 (UTC) -M.Altenmann >t 02:51, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets GNG [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] —Мандичка^YO 😜 09:29, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- These references basically say "tatonov was in a concert". Of course, all musicians do concerts. This is their job. And announcements about concerts is how people know about them. NOne of the sources listed discusses the person in depth, required by the cited GNG criteria. -M.Altenmann >t 15:14, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There are Russian language pages, which Russian language readers can appreciate. The article refers to none of them, of course, and voting to "keep" an unimproved article that says untrue things because a perfect article would establish fringe "keep" criteria is an stretch (esp. given the Russian language sources being in several cases local and in others unclear as for whether they are discussions of the person or mentions of an event). The article is unencyclopedic and fails to meet notability standards. Hithladaeus (talk) 19:30, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment to forestall the obvious comment: Someone will no doubt helpfully point out that guideline this or that says the other or another. Imagine an article that says "Henny Youngman was my dog." Should that be kept? What duty is there to the article creator? If the AfD debaters essentially do all the work in a debate, and none of them lift a finger to fix the article, and vote "keep" and "snow keep" and "where are the snow keeps of yesterday?" then the result will be an article that sticks around with a lie. "Eventualism" is a fine thing, but so is the primary mission of an encyclopedia. Obviously, this article is not an equivalent case, but that is the principle behind my vote, esp. when people move to keep solely on the basis of a list of references they themselves generate. Hithladaeus (talk) 19:30, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:49, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:13, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Purge Russian wiki says nothing about him, all sources seem to be self-published or promotional. Solntsa90 (talk) 00:26, 9 June 2015 (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.