Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Svetilnik

Add links
Source: 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 delete. After discounting IPs and single-purpose accounts, at any rate.  Sandstein  20:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Svetilnik

Svetilnik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The society's notability can't be established through reliable secondary or tertiary sources. Eleassar my talk 07:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This organization is the most reputable classical liberal think tank in Slovenia. It is widely known in Slovenia as as well as abroad. 84.112.194.146 (talk) 17:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed. Everything that I see in the article is just a passing mention. --Eleassar my talk 18:55, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the article again, as it has been recently updated with references. 195.66.69.18 (talk) 10:17, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 03:38, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • This link only shows how disinterested people at the Slovenian Wikipedia are in establishing Svetilnik’s notability. Assuming you are one of them, I suggest you establish this fact by actually reading the Wikipedia article about Svetilnik (unless you are not interested in the truth). Staining the Slovenian Wikipedia with your lack of professionalism is one thing, but trying to do this with the English Wikipedia is not going to fly so easily. People who decide about deletion of an article at the English Wikipedia do care about the truth. You may keep closing your eyes from the truth, but there are people in this world who do not.77.38.55.136 (talk) 09:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is a common misconception that a notability can be established by Wikipedia itself, be it Slovenian or English one, however, this is not true since Wikipedia is not a "light". It is only a "mirror" reflecting the light, if there is any out there. Notability needs to be established "out there" in (notable) secondary sources and if they exist, they are cited by Wikipedia in references. If there are no secondary sources covering a matter of WP article as its topic, not only a passing mention, then WP has nothing to reflect. Also, the supporters of this article claim that their aim is a promotion of classical liberalism, but none of them has made any effort to translate content from Classical liberalism and write an article in Slovenian Wikipedia about it, they skipped hard work and went straight to their own self-promotion article. If their aim was sincerely a promotion of classical liberalism, and not mere self-promotion, this (i.e. Classical liberalism in Slovene) would not be a red link over there. It seems that their aim is a self-promotion, rather then a promotion. Article about Svetilnik on Slovenian WP will be deleted, because the consensus over there is it lacks notability in secondary sources, so it should be here on English WP. --DancingPhilosopher my talk 11:38, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 07:41, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:04, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This organization's notability is dubious at best, and I'm concerned about WP:NPOV because it appears that the article was written solely by its representative(s) using single-purpose account(s). About the only possibly relevant reference is the one by the Economic Freedom Network, others are indirect or merely passing mentions. I'll leave the decision whether that's enough to others, but I lean towards delete - not necessarily for any single reason stated, but for combination of all the reasons (supported by the drama about The Truth above). — Yerpo Eh? 14:11, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Svetilnik is well known around the world as the leading Slovenian classical liberal think tank. Its Liberty Seminars attract participants from all over Europe and beyond. Its notability is unquestionable. - Paris — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.167.111.85 (talk) 22:01, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, then you'll have no problem in finding reliable secondary sources to confirm that. Until then, [citation needed]. — Yerpo Eh? 06:49, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason to delete the article regarding Svetilnik. I have not found one error in article about them. I have attended 3 of their events: the Free Market Road Show in 2011, a couple of lectures at the Liberty Seminar in 2012, and most recently a lecture given by Tom Palmer on the "End of the Welfare State", a book he edited. I have found the events to be highly informative with well-respected and credentialed presenters. As for the Liberty Seminars, it offers students from around the world the opportunity to attend education sessions on liberty and economics; I met them myself last August. I know for a fact that the organization is in association with Atlas, a think tank in the USA. If Wikipedia is interested in providing information that is accurate, then in my opinion the article should without question remain. In fact, I find it mystifying that anyone is trying to get the article removed. (I also put this comment under talk. First time user and unsure where to post it. Per Wikipedia I am "Iscem") — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iscem (talk • contribs) 13:53, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would help in demistyfying it for you if you actually read what the deletion supporters wrote, including links to relevant Wikipedia guidelines that we included. Whoever sent you here to write your personal opinion about the society does not realize that personal opinions and unsupported "statements of fact" are irrelevant, so this mobilizing is rather pointless and counter-productive. It merely shows that they couldn't care less about Wikipedia beyond what's useful for their promotion. — Yerpo Eh? 15:01, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have attended some lectures organized by Svetilnik and I have to point out that they are held on a high level and focused on subjects of economic and personal freedom, subjects discussed in Slovenian public far too seldom. The information on their events is spread through emails and Facebook page (which is the way I am updated) and all information and publications issued are on their web page. It appears that no other blogs, web pages or news publishers cover them which might be the reason why there are so few secondary or tertiary sources. Their web page is a reach source of information about Svetilnik, but if I understand the debate here, this does not count as a reliable source. I should stress at this point that other web pages, news papers and weekly/monthly magazines are not a reliable source in Slovenia either. Any kind or type of information can be published (and is being published on a regular basis) in Slovenian publication in exchange for an asset or a favor in return. In this regard, the inertness of Svetilnik to main stream media and internet publishers is a sign of independence and professionalism. It would be a real shame if their independence would eventually lead to deletion of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.104.80.222 (talk) 16:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Delete, wasn't able to find anything of substance on this group in English that was from an independent or reliable source. Of course, there may be such things in Slovenian that I can't find because I don't have Slovenian. I also note for the closing admin that many of the comments to keep this article are coming from clear WP:SPA accounts. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:15, 28 February 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Svetilnik&oldid=1138809673"