- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Nail Olpak
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Nail Olpak ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
President and chairman of the executive board of Foreign Economic Relations Board of Turkey (DEİK), the sources cited are press releases, bio handouts or DEIK owned media. Subject fails WP:GNG. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 06:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Turkey. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 06:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep - Smiles.. I wouldn’t know how you determine your WP:GNG, kindly do a google query on the subject. Hundreds of publications on him and his activities. Kind regards Wikipractitioner ( talk) 07:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipractitioner is a single-purpose account whose sole contribution to Wikipedia so far has been the creation of this article. - The Gnome ( talk) 17:02, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 11:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm having a difficult time finding any independent reliable sources in which he is more than just a passing mention. In parallel, roughly half of the sources in this article are simple biographical entries that do not really count towards notability and would be easy to stumble upon for most people not notable enough in terms of the criteria in Wikipedia. He is a passing mention in a few of the other sources that are news articles. Maybe a little more than that in the article from Anadolu Agency. And the rest are not independent from the subject. Overall, there is no indication of notability.
Aintabli (
talk) 22:39, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
-
Karar,
Anadolu Agency,
Bloomberg’s HT,
Milliyet,
Daily Sabah and
Yeni Şafak were all cited and are obviously reliable enough. Quite confusing on how subject is not independent of these sources, and other referenced sources asides footnote #10. Except there’s another Wikipedia guidebook being used that’s not
WP:GNG &
WP:SOAP, it’ll be wrong to delete. Kind regards.
Wikipractitioner (
talk) 23:41, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
- Those sources are "obviously reliable enough"?! For those of you who don't read Turkish just look at the color for Yeni Şafak on https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipedi:G%C3%BCvenilir_kaynaklar/M%C3%BCtemadi_kaynaklar as it is the same color as Daily Sabah on /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources Chidgk1 ( talk) 12:56, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
-
Karar,
Anadolu Agency,
Bloomberg’s HT,
Milliyet,
Daily Sabah and
Yeni Şafak were all cited and are obviously reliable enough. Quite confusing on how subject is not independent of these sources, and other referenced sources asides footnote #10. Except there’s another Wikipedia guidebook being used that’s not
WP:GNG &
WP:SOAP, it’ll be wrong to delete. Kind regards.
Wikipractitioner (
talk) 23:41, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. An article
full of padding, which cannot hide the subject's lack of notability. To wit: We have an
article about something else, the election of the Industrialists Association, in which our subject, being an industrialist, is name dropped; the
Daily Sabah
report about, once again, something irrelevant ("economic reforms in Turkey") in which our subject is, once again, name-dropped for his opinion; a
"message from the president" written by our subject; a bunch of lame
advertorials
here,
here, and
here; a plain
listing in the "biyografya" website; and so on. Well,
Wikipedia is not a collection of random information or
vanity projects. -
The Gnome (
talk) 17:02, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- From talks of subject independent sources to claims of trivial mentions and Advertorials to allegation of having this work as my lone contribution on Wikipedia which are all false. Subject is notable and passes GNG. Non of the sourced articles are promotional nor unambiguously appear to be biographical handouts as claimed earlier. Please do note that I do not have any interest/benefits/affiliation/expectations from either the subject or its associates as I do not live in Turkey. Nonetheless, I suspect a deliberate collaboration from some editors in bringing works down and thereby not surprised at some of the submissions. Wether deleted or kept, I will not let these set of persons intimidate me. Kind regards. Wikipractitioner ( talk) 18:21, 26 September 2023 (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.