Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hungarian Wikipedia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. (non-admin closure) →Bmusician 00:48, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Hungarian Wikipedia (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)
Non-notable web site. There are third-party citations, but they are all in Hungarian. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:15, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep quote from WP:NOTE: "Sources are not required to be available online, and they are not required to be in English." (my emphasis). The Hungarian Wikipedia is widely reported about in Hungarian. See some of the news coverage specific to the Hungarian Wiki since 2008 and 2004-2007. These include many reliable secondary sources such as the Hungarian national TV and national newspapers. The article can be much improved, including improving referencing, but notability is established. --ELEKHHT 01:26, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Meets GNG. Beyond that, there seems that "Wikipedia studies" is a minor growth industry in academia and it really is about time for Wikipedians to start taking their own history seriously. So Bravo to the creator of this one. Carrite (talk) 04:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Response This is perfectly appropriate for Meta. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- keep wait since when did 3rd party citations have to be in english? --KarlB (talk) 18:53, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Response They don't have to be, but how can I know if a source is reliable or credible if I can't understand it? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You can use google translate or ask a Hungarian speaking Wikipedian, before nominating for deletion. --ELEKHHT 23:29, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Response They don't have to be, but how can I know if a source is reliable or credible if I can't understand it? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Asinine (silly to the point of being stupid, or stupid to the point of being silly) rationale from nominator, meriting sanctions. Satisfies WP:N. Edison (talk) 04:53, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2012 (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.