Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaromil

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. czar ⨹ 04:36, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jaromil

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Posting on behalf of User:96.57.23.82 who misposted this to RfD. Nomination reason is: "This is a vanity page and doesn't even use the autobiographers real name, but a pseudonym. Then he points to this page on the internet as proof that he is famous. https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20141201.180010.0780a0b8.en.html this page needs to go." Ivanvector (talk) 16:26, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 16:28, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 16:28, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Having difficulty finding coverage in RS. NickCT (talk) 16:36, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the only RS mention I found at all was one sentence in a blurb about a fork of Debian. Not close to enough for notability. Ivanvector (talk) 17:34, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — The real name issue brought up by the nominator is irrelevant. Jaromil's work is well known within the free software community but only under his pseudonym. If I was looking for an article on the subject, this is where I would look for it. It sure looks like this AfD is in response to some disagreement on a mailing list which has resulted in somebody who is annoyed by the subject trying to delete their article in response. This kind of thing always makes me very skeptical. That said, issues with the article have been discussed on the article's talk page for years and even the subjected has raised the option of deletion himself.

In term of notability and reliable sources, I basically agree with NickCT. I did searches in Factiva and LexisNexis Academic and didn't come back with anything that looked like it would meet the WP:GNG. Some of his work (which spans programming/art) does seem notable and appears from his biography to have been acquired and/or curated by major European and American art museums. My sense is that if Wikipedia:Notability (artists) had succeeded as a guideline (it did not), this would probably be a keep under that policy in at least two ways. It didn't, so I'm not sure where that leaves us. I'll just comment for now and wait to see how this develops. —mako ๛ 17:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Such notability is established by coverage in reliable sources, per WP:GNG. WP:Notability (artists) fails because it's a proposed guideline for the art, but the artist doesn't automatically inherit notability. If they are a prolific or important artist it will be documented by reliable sources. I did try to search with this in mind but didn't come up with anything, but others might have more success. Ivanvector (talk) 18:04, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, then redirect to Jaromil Jireš. I'm not finding much in terms of RS. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:44, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see that name come up when I Googled "Jaromil". Is the filmmaker well known by his first name? Ivanvector (talk) 19:46, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, but he's the only Jaromil with an article. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose: Jaromil/Jaromił is a regular slavic first name. While those see relatively little popularity compared to Christian names, they're nothing out of ordinary. Redirecting to some random guy (a niche filmmaker) who happened to have such a first name doesn't make any sense. If this article gets deleted, I'd replace it with a stub "Jaromil is a given name, blah blah blah", or, alternatively, redirect to "Slavic name". KiloByte (talk) 01:11, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please consider this deletion has been filed (by unregistered IP users) in coincidence with personal attacks, public threats and insults I have received by exposing myself as co-leader of the Devuan project, a fork of Debian to defend the GNU/Linux distribution from the systemd avalanche, a much debated topic flaming the open source communities. The mailinglist post quoted above leads to some of the incriminated threads. Here a bibliography about my activities as reported by Google https://www.google.com/search?q=jaromil&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1&gws_rd=ssl#newwindow=1&tbm=bks&q=jaromil+dyne . Thanks for your attention to details and for all your volunteer work on Wikipedia: I liked it back when we were sharing the top10 opensource projects podium in 2005 (I had dyne:bolic in there) and I will even if an article about me is deleted by a democratic process that involves legitimate Wikipedia editors. jaromil (talk) 17:54, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:43, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This does seem to be related to Jaromil's involvement in forking the Debian Linux Distro (the Devuan project). The whole notion of doing so seems to bring out a spate of rabid personality types and personal attacks. The request to delete the page seems to be coming from such a motivation. Personally, in evaluating Devuan, I've found it helpful to consult pages about those involved. Deletion of this page is inappropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfidelman (talk • contribs) 22:47, 8 December 2014 (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.