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 no consensus‎. Essentially, there haven't been any really substantive arguments that give a clear consensus, and after three relists, it's time to bring discussion to a close. However, the article is in very poor shape, so no prejudice against renomination if it is not improved. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:44, 13 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Joro the Paver (  | 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)

Non-notable BLP article with only 2 (quite unreliable) references. QuickQuokka [⁠ talkcontribs 02:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to hear more policy-based opinions on this article subject.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 20 August 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment I don't think this is a BLP when all the biographical information that exists is a nickname for an anonymous person but I'm also not impressed with the sources presented. I'd relist this discussion but I think that would demonstrate an opinion on this closure so I'll just leave a comment. Liz Read! Talk! 02:32, 27 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This would benefit from a source analysis as at the moment we have one editor says the sources are bad and another says they are good. Why?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 02:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 10:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep look, the article as written needs a lot of work and I wouldn't accept it at AfC (I have a rule where I don't "go outside the references" at AfC to determine notability) but after a source search it's either crystal clear this article can be improved through reliable sources, or I'm entirely failing at understanding which Bulgarian sources are reliable. SportingFlyer T· C 12:51, 5 September 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Having looked at the sources, I'm skeptical that the subject of this article warrants inclusion under WP:NEVENT / WP:CRIME (both of which require some sense of being a "well-documented historic event" or "enduring historical significance"/""widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources"). Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 16:20, 11 September 2023 (UTC) reply
    The sources in the article are horrible. A WP:BEFORE search clears things up, especially in Cyrillic. SportingFlyer T· C 22:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC) reply
    I've done a search, but the sources I've found have had insufficient quality. Would you mind sharing the high-quality sources that you've seen? Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 21:10, 12 September 2023 (UTC) reply
    Stuff like this is par for the course in Balkan news print. Dnevnik had four hits but all of those articles were paywalled. It was also at least mentioned in this article. I'm not an expert in Bulgarian media and have only spent about three minutes on this so apologies if these aren't the best sources - they're representative. SportingFlyer T· C 21:47, 12 September 2023 (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.