Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pora valit

From 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. North America1000 00:26, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pora valit (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 article itself is factually incorrect. It is not a blog, but a livejournal community, in which users can post or crosspost from other blogs, so it doesn't even belong in its current category. The community does contain a few thousand users (few of them active), but it is not notable enough even within Russia or for Russian wikipedia - there are some occasional mentions in local media or in more prominent blogs, but nothing worthy of a Wikipedia article. The references are circular - [1] and [3] are the same thing and they both simply refer to [2]. [4] just shows the position of the community in the current rating for russian LJ segment - it may have been at the top once, but isn't even in top 10 anymore. The Economist article is the only actual reference - and it only mentions the subject once, in passing, it isn't even the main topic of that article. In short, it just doesn't pass WP:N, nor did it even back in the day when the community was at the peak activity. Malachi108 (talk) 12:43, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 02:30, 5 May 2017 (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.