This article was nominated for deletion on 24 October 2020. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Esad Kurtović article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page was proposed for deletion by Onel5969 ( talk · contribs) on 24 October 2020. |
As I explained in edit-summary, BLP article on academic E.Kurtović is very important in context of Bosnian historiography, so I really think that I have valid reason to contest this PROD. Beside argument postulated in my edit-summary, I also do not see violation of criteria given in WP:GNG and especially in WP:NACADEMIC - an explanation given by nominator surely contains a bit of contradictory claim, where "accomplished" academic, which Kurtović certainly is, somehow fails to meet aforementioned WP:NACADEMIC. Also postulated in edit-summary is my belief that Google Scholar citation count is not decisive criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia, as such would render too many prominent scholars working in small and very small, especially non-English language, academic milieus and in a fields and subjects of exclusively local significance and on specific topics, unfairly omitted from the project - Kurtović is very prominent Medievalist in Balkan and in particular Bosnian-Herzegovinian context, so I am sorry but I can't agree with this nomination and I feel that I need to contest PROD. As for "anemic" references, well, that was never the reason for article deletion, even when lacking completely we deal with that issue with template messages, unless article is obviously failing on notability.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 19:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 24 October 2020. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Esad Kurtović article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page was proposed for deletion by Onel5969 ( talk · contribs) on 24 October 2020. |
As I explained in edit-summary, BLP article on academic E.Kurtović is very important in context of Bosnian historiography, so I really think that I have valid reason to contest this PROD. Beside argument postulated in my edit-summary, I also do not see violation of criteria given in WP:GNG and especially in WP:NACADEMIC - an explanation given by nominator surely contains a bit of contradictory claim, where "accomplished" academic, which Kurtović certainly is, somehow fails to meet aforementioned WP:NACADEMIC. Also postulated in edit-summary is my belief that Google Scholar citation count is not decisive criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia, as such would render too many prominent scholars working in small and very small, especially non-English language, academic milieus and in a fields and subjects of exclusively local significance and on specific topics, unfairly omitted from the project - Kurtović is very prominent Medievalist in Balkan and in particular Bosnian-Herzegovinian context, so I am sorry but I can't agree with this nomination and I feel that I need to contest PROD. As for "anemic" references, well, that was never the reason for article deletion, even when lacking completely we deal with that issue with template messages, unless article is obviously failing on notability.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 19:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)