Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oktay eser

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.. Carlossuarez46 02:19, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oktay eser

Oktay eser (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Autobiography. Is he notable? -- RHaworth 08:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

Comment That he has written four books seems to be the only notable fact. Any info about these books anyone? Were they bestsellers or acclaimed publications? --Malcolmxl5 08:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

P.S. There is an assertation of notability of sort on the talk page "[he] has made contributions to the mutual understanding between different cultures", which I have added to the article but it needs independent verification. --Malcolmxl5 08:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Translating poetry and writing language textbooks does not make you notable by any stretch. And all translators can claim they make "contributions to the mutual understanding between different cultures". I would know, I'm a translator. --Targeman 11:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. —David Eppstein 16:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Uncertain I just note that writing widely used textbooks is one of the reasons for notability at WP:PROF, but it does not seem to apply here. DGG (talk) 04:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC) -- changed on the basis of the comments below. DGG (talk) 05:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I can read and speak Turkish. The books here are not the English teaching books. One of the book titles tells us that it contains elements of Translation Philosophy, which is a field in its infancy, so this makes him notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.27.151.66 (talk • contribs)

• Comment. Translation philosophy (or philosophy of translation) is by no means in its infancy, it has been around for centuries, arguably since Jerome. --Targeman 11:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. Correct, but Translation philosophy has been a hot-debated topic for quite a long time. But we must take into consideration the fact that it was just named as Translation Studies in 1975. Some new theories came into life afterwards. The theories put forward in the past are helpful, but not scientific.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.27.151.66 (talk • contribs)

• Keep Translating poetry is not easy at all. I think this quality is of importance to anybody interested in literature.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.97.24.237 (talk • contribs) — 85.97.24.237 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Comment. Wow, does that mean I can write an article about myself? I've translated poetry too, and you're right, it's a major pain in the ;! --Targeman 02:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. Translated poetry here have all been published.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.27.151.66 (talk • contribs)

• Keep He is a lecturer at university. His works need not be best-sellers. They are of academic importance.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.101.95.77 (talk • contribs) — 85.101.95.77 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• See my comment above. --Targeman 02:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nabla 23:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

• Relisting - some keep points raised by 3 anon users near closing time. I think we better have more input on these. - Nabla 23:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I'm sorry but I REALLY do not like the way the article is laid out, AT ALL. --Malcolmxl5 21:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - if he published original works on translation philosophy, the article doesn't say so. No English language sources; I can't read the Turkish sources given, but forewords and publishers don't make independent, reliable sources anyway. --Huon 21:39, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - Why not keep. He is a translator, a lecturer, and an author of several books. He is certain to serve the society in different ways. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.156.180.251 (talk • contribs) — 212.156.180.251 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. .
• Strong keep - The book entitled "Çeviri de Bizim Dilimiz" deals with the philosophy of translation in which one can read about poetry translation, text-types and how they function, and how the decision-making process occurs in the translator's mind. This is all about the philosophy thereof. In addition, the title being in Turkish, but not in English should not be an obstacle. On the contrary, it is a pinch of taste for us all. Therefore, we had better "keep" this in mind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.101.236.134 (talk • contribs) — 85.101.236.134 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

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.