Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antoni Julian Nowowiejski

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 closing per policy, obvious keep consensus. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 22:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Antoni Julian Nowowiejski

Antoni Julian Nowowiejski (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Completely unsourced, doesn't assert its NOTE, poorly-written. NB: the notability requirement is that it asserts its notability by citing several independent and reliable sources. Simply saying "bishops are notable" is not meeting the requirement. Sorry, bish! --Porcupine (prickle me!) 19:33, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletions. — Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep (creator). Yes, it is a substub, but it is obvious that a beatified bishop and a historian is notable. Also, a cursory check of 'what links here' will reaveal the article is listed on the list of missing subjects of the Polish Biographical Dictionary. If one doubts that such a person is notable, please read WP:BIO - something I'd highly recommend to anybody dealing with prodding and AfDing. If one wants to see the article expanded and or reference, please tag it with {{expand}} and {{Unreferenced}}, and/or request it on article creator's (mine) talk page or on discussion pages of relevant boards (ex. WP:PWNB). Templating the regulars and wasting their time (I could have expanded the article instead of writing rationale for this vote) is not advisable (per WP:DTTR and so on).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep:I think notability is achieved since the subject is a Bishop of Płock. Anyways, it's a stub, and has potential to grow. - Rjd0060 19:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Tag it properly instead of delete. Notable person since he is a bishop and beatified person. Visor 20:00, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Clearly notable and deserving of an article, even if there's little content at present. --Michig 20:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Being raised to bishop isn't notable? Hmm, well, when you are raised to the title of Bishop, and beatified at that, then we can debate the notability of being a Bishop. I find numerous references on Google, but since I speak only English, cannot state anything further than that. Yngvarr (t) (c) 20:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I think easily meets notability, and since has already been stubbed, this is a strong keep. Wstaffor 21:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, as per Visor above. I fail to see any impetus for nominating an article for deletion before it has even had time to develop. Personally, I believe there's far too much stock put in saying "no" (delete and "speedy!" delete) being a positive contribution.  —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 21:25, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Bishops are notable and nominating such an article so soon after it's creation is out of order too. Did the nominator look for any sources himself before wasting everyone else's time here? Nick mallory 00:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Piotrus. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 15:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep Bishops generally receive enough coverage to establish notability and this one is even more notable than the norm. Davewild 19:13, 24 September 2007 (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.