Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hungary: Difference between revisions

By /

 

Line 18: Line 18:

=== Others ===

=== Others ===

<noinclude>==== Categories ====</noinclude>

<noinclude>

==== Categories ====

</noinclude>

<!– To list categories discussed at WP:CFD use

<!– To list categories discussed at WP:CFD use

* {{cfdl|category name|log date (optional)|discussion name (optional)|discussion start date|discussion close date|result}}

* {{cfdl|category name|log date (optional)|discussion name (optional)|discussion start date|discussion close date|result}}

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

<noinclude>==== Deletion reviews ====</noinclude>

<noinclude>

==== Deletion reviews ====

</noinclude>

<!– To list pages appealed at WP:DRV use

<!– To list pages appealed at WP:DRV use

* {{drvl|page name|date in YYYY Month D format|}}

* {{drvl|page name|date in YYYY Month D format|}}

Line 29: Line 33:

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

<noinclude>==== Miscellaneous ====</noinclude>

<noinclude>

==== Miscellaneous ====

</noinclude>

<!– To list miscellaneous pages discussed at WP:MFD use

<!– To list miscellaneous pages discussed at WP:MFD use

* {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/page name}}

* {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/page name}}

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

<noinclude>==== Proposed deletions ====</noinclude>

<noinclude>

==== Proposed deletions ====

</noinclude>

<!– To list articles in this section use

<!– To list articles in this section use

* {{Prodded|Article name|YYYY-MM-DD|}}

* {{Prodded|Article name|YYYY-MM-DD|}}

Line 42: Line 50:

*{{prodded|Flag of Serbia (Habsburg)|2025-03-19}}

*{{prodded|Flag of Serbia (Habsburg)|2025-03-19}}

<noinclude>==== Redirects ====</noinclude>

<noinclude>

==== Redirects ====

</noinclude>

<!– To list redirects discussed at WP:RFD use

<!– To list redirects discussed at WP:RFD use

* {{xfdl|rfd|page name|||discussion start date|discussion close date|result}}

* {{xfdl|rfd|page name|||discussion start date|discussion close date|result}}

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

<noinclude>==== Templates ====</noinclude>

<noinclude>

==== Templates ====

</noinclude>

<!– To list templates discussed at WP:TFD use

<!– To list templates discussed at WP:TFD use

* {{tfdl2|template name|log date (optional)|discussion name (optional)|discussion start date|discussion close date|result}}

* {{tfdl2|template name|log date (optional)|discussion name (optional)|discussion start date|discussion close date|result}}

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

New items should be placed at the top of any existing list, directly below this hidden notice. –>

<noinclude>== See also ==

<noinclude>

== See also ==

* [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Hungary/Article alerts]], a bot-maintained listing of a variety of changes affecting Hungary related pages including deletion discussions

* [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Hungary/Article alerts]], a bot-maintained listing of a variety of changes affecting Hungary related pages including deletion discussions

</noinclude>

</noinclude>

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Hungary. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace “PageName” with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Hungary|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Hungary. For the other XfD’s, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia’s deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Europe.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Magyarországi Bőripari Munkások Szövetsége (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not seem notable, and I couldn’t find any relevant non-primary news sources about this union on Google. GrinningIodize (talk) 23:01, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Csányi-Wills (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

British composer (BLP). Sources are a routine entry on a database, a sleevenote for a CD recording of his work, and a page on the composer’s own website: there’s nothing here (or on a quick Google search) that amounts to significant coverage in sources independent of the subject, as required for WP:BASIC. I can’t see any indication that he meets WP:MUSICBIO either. Dionysodorus (talk) 23:26, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zoltán Fehér (diplomat) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet notability for either WP:NACADEMIC or WP:NBIO. There’s a passing mention in WP:WASHINGTONTIMES but otherwise the majority of sources are primary (institution biographies/PR); see source assessment table for the breakdown. Sariel Xilo (talk) 16:06, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Added table Sariel Xilo (talk) 16:07, 12 September 2025 (UTC))[reply]

Keep. There is plenty in there to establish notability. Calling the Washington Times article “passing mention” is ridiculous. It is a 10-paragraph profile article about this guy, where the U.S. Secretary of Commerce talks about his work. I’ve looked him up. He’s written a ton of articles. He’s given interviews about international politics in many countries. He was an Ambassador. He is a professor. Isabella Gomez Diaz (talk) 17:50, 13 September 2025 (UTC) — Isabella Gomez Diaz (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Note: Isabella removed their comment at 18:31, 13 September 2025 (UTC); I restored & added the WP:REDACTED format. Sariel Xilo (talk) 18:52, 13 September 2025 (UTC) I took the most recent edit of Isabella Gomez Diaz as no longer wishing strikethrough, so I removed that. Other parts need to remain. I don’t think that this !vote is likely to have much impact on discussion, in any case. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2025 (UTC) [reply]
  • Keep – Calling the Washington Times article a passing mention is so blatantly false that it indicates to me that the nomination was made in bad faith. Seems like there is a decent claim to notability. – Ike Lek (talk) 00:09, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Zoltan Feher, one of the best diplomatic press secretaries on Embassy Row, is having such a good time saying goodbye that he jokes he may return to Washington soon, if his friends will throw him more farewell parties.
    Mr. Feher, spokesman at the Hungarian Embassy for four years, is going home to Budapest to serve in the Foreign Ministry. His time in Washington coincided with the lively, rock ’n’ roll ambassador, Andras Simonyi, and Mr. Feher was so successful at getting his boss in the news that some reporters called him “Zoltan, the Magnificent.”

    This isn’t an in-depth article about his diplomatic career; the first half of the article is about his going away party. Those first two paragraphs cover him; paragraph 3 is on Andras Simonyi with the last line “Mr. Feher was there to make sure reporters got a good story“. The next 2 are quotes from Feher & the following 4 are quotes from embassy staff & party guests about him; paragraph 10 is just a list of the other guests. The second half of the article (everything under the heading “LIBERIA’S FUTURE“) doesn’t mention him at all. In terms of coverage that could provide notability, that seems like a passing mention because it is mostly quotes from coworkers; the block quote is the extent of the reporter talking about his career. If you had several articles like this, you could probably coble together something to work for notability but this article alone doesn’t do it.
    8 of the sources are simply bios from institutions he has worked at (colleges, etc); some other sources that aren’t independent include his CV, a press release and article he wrote. Do you have three sources that show notability? Sariel Xilo (talk) 01:01, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For example, compare that article to this one on Luigi Di Maio by the Washington Times; if the Feher article was this in-depth, then it would easily count towards notability. Sariel Xilo (talk) 01:15, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from anything else, and more shortly: the Washington Times is a marginal source, per WP:RSP. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 22:14, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: While your IP range has been temp blocked (WP:LOGOUT), you can respond once you log back in. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:50, 18 September 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Turkic Scout Bloc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable organisation – article based on news releases for its launch. No in depth independent coverage found. Does not pass WP:NCORP. Mccapra (talk) 15:19, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. We have three different outcomes proposed here. We should at least get one option that two editors support.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:14, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top