Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lesokhimik

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 closure) Jdcomix (talk) 20:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lesokhimik

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

Not notable, inadequate content for verifiability, created by same CU blocked user that created Metallurg Bratsk which is also at AfD. ^{Atsme📞📧} 02:58, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: - this is a 2nd tier team, not the "top" as required per WP:Notability (sports) - there is nothing else that qualifies under GNG, and there are no indepedent sources for WP:V. ^{Atsme📞📧} 19:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First, they used to be a top tier team before 2008. Second, I am not sure why you continue to maintain there are no independent sources after I explained to you why all sources are independent of the team.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's an organization (club) - see WP:ORGDEPTH which this organization fails, particularly Deep coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond routine announcements and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about an organization. I've looked at the sources and translated the information, and what I've seen falls under except works carrying merely trivial coverage, such as: - it is also a defunct organization. If I see sources that convince me otherwise, I will not hesitate to withdraw the nom. ^{Atsme📞📧} 20:27, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I am afraid your understanding of WP:GNG is very far from consensus, and I hope the closing admin will take a correct decision.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Team is notable beacuse they played in the Russian league, one of the two top bandy leagues, for a couple of seasons. Smartskaft (talk) 00:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:Notability (sports) - the cited sources have to be independent and "articles about sports, must be verifiable." This article doesn't meet those requirements. ^{Atsme📞📧} 02:56, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

^{Listed at WikiProject Russia & WikiProject Sports ^{Atsme📞📧} 16:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)}[reply]

Actually, the sources are clearly independent of the team (the sources are the Russian Bandy federation and the main bandy internet portal in Russia), and the article must be kept, but I just added two more sources (major Russian sports portals, not specifically bandy-related).--Ymblanter (talk) 19:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:IIS for an in-depth explanation of what I'm referring to as "independent" sources. ^{Atsme📞📧} 20:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My point exactly: An independent source is a source that has no vested interest in a given Wikipedia topic and therefore is commonly expected to cover the topic from a disinterested perspective.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think www.bandysidan.nu. doesn't have an interest in wanting the teams to succeed? ^{Atsme📞📧} 22:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is about the same as removing from the articles of the Olympians references to IOC protocols because IOC may want some of them to succeed. Or removing from the articles on performers of classical music sources in journals specialized on classical music. Such understading of WP:GNG goes completely counter to the established practice.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No...the Olympic competition is world-wide and the athletes who compete typically have won numerous national championships. There is no comparison. ^{Atsme📞📧} 23:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We obviously disagree. Let us wait for the closing admin.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:16, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, see above.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, the Russian WP article on this club is here - [1], unfortunately, it has no references. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:41, 16 February 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.