Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Władysław Szulist

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. Sandstein 08:40, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Władysław Szulist

Władysław Szulist (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)

Amateur historian. Most works self published ([1]) or published by local museum / very low key journals/magazines/newspapers. Citation count on GScholar falls well below WP:PROF (through GScholar is not great at indexing non-English language works and their impact). Awards limited to medal of local historical association. Coverage in media limited to local sources (town portal and like). I appreciate historians, but not all of them are notable. I am afraid this one, while certainly commendable for his activities, is not yet encyclopedic. (PS. Red flag - no article on inclusionist pl wikipedia...). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:28, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:28, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Teetering back and forth but probably coming down on the side of delete - Whilst Szulist clearly wrote a lot of books, and also presented a television program on Gunter Grass, the only real reliable source coverage I could find about him was this article in a regional newspaper. One more hit like that in a different reliable source (preferably a national one with less interview commentary) and I'd probably flip to keep per WP:BASIC, but as it is it doesn't get over the line. FOARP (talk) 08:25, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:04, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:04, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete we need sourcing about him, not bare proof that he published work. Also the whole rhetoric on Kashubian-Americans in the article boils down to fringe theories on what are and what are not ethnic groups.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:55, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -- This does not read to me like fiction, but as a person who has done a lot of research into an obscure subject, a small ethnic group in what is now part of Poland. I note that the Kashubian WP has an article on him, so that it presumably thinks him notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:10, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just noting that Kashubian wiki is one of those 'preserve language' projects written by <10 active editors and with real world readership of <100 or so. Nobody except language activists reads this, so it is not a useful metric. As I noted, the fact that he is absent from Polish Wikipedia is more relevant (since unlike Kashubian wiki it has some criteria for notability). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:06, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete As the author of, apparently, 7 works, he could also be assessed against WP:NAUTHOR, if there are reviews of the books, etc. I don't find any trying to google the titles - but I don't have access to offline or paywalled journals where reviews might be found. As for articles, etc, about him - I also found this [2] (the same article that FOARP found). If there was coverage of him in Poland pre-internet or pre-digitised news, I don't have access to it. Despite his extensive travels through the US and Canada, Newspapers.com shows only brief mentions of him in 1997 in a notice of an upcoming event, and a letter to the editor after the event. It looks like he doesn't meet any notability guidelines, though offline coverage of him or of his works may exist. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:24, 22 November 2019 (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.