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. Sandstein 09:00, 5 August 2018 (UTC) reply

Sedmikostelí (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Crappy bot article that doesn't meet WP:NBOOK nor GNG. » Shadowowl | talk 17:38, 21 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. MT Train Talk 17:57, 21 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. MT Train Talk 17:57, 21 July 2018 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:48, 28 July 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per Andrew Davidson and Vejvančický. James500 ( talk) 22:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect pending someone introducing some accurate, verifiable information that isn't already included in Miloš Urban. Having a one-sentence article that only duplicates a fraction of the relevant information in the main article is unhelpful. No comment on notability or potential to become more than a useless non-article. Hijiri 88 ( やや) 23:26, 28 July 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: I have expanded this article from the source provided by Andrew Davidson. To be honest I would have no problems with the article being merged into Miloš Urban for the time being, as they are both short articles. Urban is a pretty significant author in CR though, and there is no doubt a proper article could be written about him; I will try to get round to it at some point. At any rate, deletion nominations for books such as this by authors such as this without due process are fairly cynical, and I daresay there are better ways to approach it. Jdcooper ( talk) 22:29, 4 August 2018 (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.