Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Osman Nuri Topbas

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 of the debate was no consensus – Gurch 21:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Osman Nuri Topbas

The article has been a mess since October, without much improvement. I'm unconvinced that notability can be established. Indeed, I've little idea what's going on here. Mackensen (talk) 00:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC) Additional comment to the closing admin: don't interpret my nomination as a desire for deletion; it seems notability can be established. Mackensen (talk) 14:02, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete: It's still mostly untranslated, and usually we delete articles that remain untranslated for more than two weeks. --Hetar 00:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
  • We typically AfD them after they have been listed for translation at WP:PNT for two weeks and haven't been translated. This one had the wrong tag and so was never found by WP:PNT. Let's try to find a Turkish speaker to help before we delete this, so keep for now. I promise to AfD it again if it doesn't get translated. Kusma (討論) 03:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep: Nobody listed the article at Wikipedia:Translation_into_English#Turkish-to-English until I did so just now, which is probably why the article wasn't translated earlier. TruthbringerToronto 00:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Quite simply, it fails to assert his notability to a high enough degree Adambiswanger1 00:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, article is not translated into English and if after two weeks, should be deleted, subject is non-notable. --Terence Ong 01:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
  • How do you know that the subject is non-notable? I guess it is nn because tr:Osman Nuri Topbaş has no nontrivial incoming links, but that is a rather weak sign of lack of notability. Do you have a better one? Kusma (討論) 03:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete for lack of translation. —Mets501^talk 03:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete . The turkish article has a big red notice at the top which machine translates as 'possible copyright ....' (i'm guessing problem?). Given this, we have no source material. Inner Earth 08:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Keep As we are addressing the copyright problems, and some links to his work have been shown, have changed my vote accordingly. Inner Earth 10:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

• Close the vote with no action, AFD is not the correct procedure. Page does contain copyvio (for those parts of it should be deleted) but the person is notable for writing religious books. --Cat out 10:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Do nothing per Cool Cat Computerjoe's talk 16:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete- no notability asserted. Reyk _YO! 20:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep (and expand) CoolCat's rewrite (thanks!), certainly delete the copyvio. Note that the subject is apparently notable enough to be translated into German, see [1]. Here's a link to the English translation of the same book at amazon. Kusma (討論) 20:28, 8 June 2006 (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.