Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Greece

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Greece. 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|Greece|~~~~}} 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 Greece. 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:
Purge page cache watch
Scan for Greece related AfDs

Scan for Greece related Prods
Scan for Greece related TfDs


Greece

[edit]

Thanos Kalliris

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Thanos Kalliris (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)

This article written about a Greek musician does not cite any reliable source that can be cross verified. Also if an editor chooses to find reliable sources or choose to add oneself, as per WP:RS, they may not find direct, reliable and primary sources for this person on the internet, but only mentions. According to WP guidelines, which strictly demands reliable sources, it should be either deleted, redirected or reduced to stub. Please leave your opinion. As: Be civil, Do not distract the discussion and your opinion should be grounded with reality. Wh67890 (talk) 00:51, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Konstantinos Lolos

[edit]
Konstantinos Lolos (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)

Declined prod. All the sources are databases/results and insufficient for meeting WP:SPORTSCRIT. This source seems dead. His medal is only for a low tier championship and does not meet WP:NATH. LibStar (talk) 03:57, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Greece. LibStar (talk) 03:57, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:LibStar, why are the Mediterranean Games a "low tier" championship? It would seem to meet WP:NATH prong 2, "Finished top 3 in any other major senior-level international competition (this includes prestigious small field meets, e.g., Diamond League / IAAF Golden League meets, less-prestigious large-scale meets, e.g., Asian Games, and any Platinum or Gold World Athletics Label Road Races that are not explicitly mentioned above)". --Habst (talk) 12:26, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas Vikhos

[edit]
Andreas Vikhos (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)

Subject does not appear to have the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. The current sources are simply databases, and all I could find elsewhere were some mentions like [[1]]. Let'srun (talk) 00:51, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Per sources found in this AfD. Svartner (talk) 17:35, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no sigcov Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 19:59, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No significant coverage that would justify having an article. ZachH007 (talk) 01:40, 20 May 2025 (UTC) Keep. Looks like there is significant coverage. ZachH007 (talk) 18:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, per significant coverage identified by Aviationwikiflight, see here. @Let'srun, LibStar, King ChristLike, Svartner, Yoblyblob, and ZachH007: BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:11, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm willing to withdraw should the other delete voters be convinced there is enough WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 19:42, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and changing my vote from provided sources and presumption that the offline sources indicate coverage. Finding these also indicates the likelihood of more offline sources Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 17:13, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Per the discussion at my talk page already linked above, I managed to find this 100-word piece on him talking about election recommendations, which is further supported by this piece of coverage on the Athenian elections that were to be held later in 1929 where he's mentioned as a candidate for the role of a municipal councilor. I also found his obituary that's around 160 words long (translated by Google Translate):

    Andreas Vichos, who passed away a few days ago, was a truly special human type, pulsating with ecumenical faith, with the understanding of social solidarity and with a creative spirit, a truly pure and enthusiastic patriot, ready for any service and sacrifice towards the nation[.] [H]e went to Crete with En pitropan[?] who called El. Venizelon in 1909 [I'm assuming this is referring to Eleftherios Venizelos and the Goudi Coup]. A volunteer in the wars of 1912-1913, he himself received more honorary recognitions, and subsequently he was actively involved in the organization and strengthening of the Thessaloniki Movement of 1916. Both during the first and second world wars he was persecuted by the Germans, ardent sports fan and former shooting athlete[.] He was a member of many sports clubs and represented the national colors in the Olympic games of Antwerp and Paris, being named the best shooter among the inter-allied nations race of 1919 in Paris. An idealistic type of family man, he raised his children with national ideals and always showed them the way to work. [...]

    Even though the following links are not significant coverage, they could perhaps add a bit more detail to the article. This talks about his memorial service and this is a one line mention of (presumably) him selling a store in a "parliament environment". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:28, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: nice save by Aviationwikiflight FuzzyMagma (talk) 15:29, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting given new sources brought to this subject leaves us as a place of No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:36, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Greece at the 1920 Summer Olympics - the newspaper article above [2] is in Greek and attempts to extract the text are frustrated because the auto text selection runs across columns and creates a mess. This frustrates machine translation, but I know a little Greek, and after spending a bit of time on this, here is my translation:

    ΑΝΔΡΕΑΣ ΒΗΧΟΣ (ANDREAS VICHOS)

    "A prominent and influential member of the mercantile world, Mr. ANDREAS VICHOS, an old [i.e long-time] Athenian and much involved in public affairs, entered the electoral race at the urging of his friends. Rightly so, as his election signifies progress for public matters and the advancement of the city of Athens, for which he has sacrificed the greater part of his life.

    Mr. Vichos will certainly be among the first to be elected on August 4th, due to his many merits and because his long mercantile life has made him beloved and popular among the Athenian people."

    So what to make of this? Well the most important thing to note is that this is a primary source. It tells us that the page subject was standing for election in Athens. WP:PRIMARYNEWS pertains. Secondly, this is not just a news report; this is an endorsement. As such, it lacks independence. Thirdly it provides almost nothing that we could place in an article even if it were not primary. What does it tell us about the subject other than he was a merchant Certainly nothing at all about what he is allegedly notable for. So this one is not going to get us anywhere.
    The obituary has a little more, but it is not much. Obituaries, in any case, also have issues with independence, often being written by family members. It would, perhaps, lead us to further information that might have better coverage, but it is not clear that will be the case. In any case, the passing acquaintance with the Olympics is an also ran in the obituary. There is definitely nothing here to sustain an article about a sportsman. "Being named best shooter" is confirmatory, but for a sports bio we need coverage of his shooting sports career, and on that we have nothing. I don't think the political career meets WP:NPOL either. Thus, I propose redirect to Greece at the 1920 Summer Olympics, where he is already mentioned alongside all the information we have about his shooting sports career. This ATD is in line with many similar cases from early Olympics. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:51, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    not disputing your vote or the essence of your argument but
    • we need coverage of his shooting sports career: that is the easiest part because there are many sites that aggregate these stats like Olympics and Olympian Database
    • Obituaries, in any case, also have issues with independence, often being written by family members.: can you prove that? I can show multiple obituaries not written by family members and I am sure you can show the opposite, but you need to support your conjecture.
    FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. You make two points. My answers:
    1. What I mean is that to sustain an argument that he is notable for the sporting career, we need significant coverage in independent reliable secondary sources that show that someone treated him as a subject, and thus wrote about him. We cannot rely solely on results tables or database sources. There is no reason, from these sources, to suppose he had a notable sporting career.
    2. The first thing to note that this obituary is on page 2 of Empros, which is a local paper for the island of Lesvos (commonly called Lesbos in English). It is under a heading titled πένθη which means "obituaries" in the plural. That is, this is an obituaries section, even if there is just one. So if you read WP:OBITUARIES, you will see an essay with guidance (which is also repeated on the reliable sources noticeboard in various places) that tells us A person who has a news obituary (and not a paid death notice) in a national quality newspaper, such as The New York Times or The Times, is usually notable. Paid death notices, on the other hand, are self published sources. See also Wikipedia:Potentially unreliable sources which has a very short section making that same point. Now here we do not know if this is a paid death notice or whether the newspaper decided to publish the information anyway. Having had some experience of this, I know that most national papers charge for these notices but a local paper often may not. However, in either case the problem is the same: the papers tend to publish these obituaries verbatim as provided to them. There is a very strong case that is what is happening here with this obituary in an obituaries section of a local newspaper. I think it falls well short of establishing notability. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:20, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    So point "2)" summarized: "It's my opinion; I have no prove for it" 95.98.65.177 (talk) 12:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No, point 2 is summarised as "this is a self published death notice and not even in a national quality newspaper". It does not count towards notability, and even if it did, it has nothing you could add about the subject's sporting career. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:24, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No it does not said that. Sirfurboy put their point forward eloquently and they should be thanked for that. It takes time to elaborate to this level so you can get your point across. I learned something today, thanks for that @Sirfurboy FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per found sources in reliable sources. It's likely seeing what is written about him that more coverage exist; but nobody here can speak Greek. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 12:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    As you know, sources must be independent, reliable, secondary sources with significant coverage of the subject. Sports bios are required to have one such IRS SIGCOV source, excluding database sources, per WP:SPORTCRIT even if there is a presumption of notability. There is no reason to presume notability here, and we don't have any IRS SIGCOV sources. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:20, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Per WP:NBASIC If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 20:45, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Note that the IP failed to include the remainder of NBASIC, that being "trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability". Let'srun (talk) 21:08, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The sources here aren't trivial, though. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:09, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Pinging @Let'srun, LibStar, King ChristLike, Svartner, Yoblyblob, ZachH007, BeanieFan11, FuzzyMagma, and Aviationwikiflight: - in an attempt to find consensus, do you have a view on the redirect above as an alternative to deletion? Thanks. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:13, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I could support the redirect. Including the save attempt by @Aviationwikiflight and per @Sirfurboy elaborations above, the subject still lacks SIGCOV in reliable secondary sources that are independent to establish notability. King ChristLike (talk) 10:12, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I support a redirect. Let'srun (talk) 23:59, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That has basically the same effect as deletion: we lose all content and likely all chances at future content on Vikhos. BeanieFan11 (talk) 13:07, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, redirection is basically equivalent to deletion as far as the content goes. I don’t understand why we are discussing an alternative to deletion when there are so many sound policy-based keep votes. The consensus as I see it seems to be tending towards keeping, which unlike redirecting, is an actual alternative to deletion. ZachH007 (talk) 03:33, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I can get behind an alternative to deletion. That alternative is to keep the article. ZachH007 (talk) 03:46, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You already !voted. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 03:49, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I boldly unbolded the duplicate !vote. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:25, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Did bolding it make it a vote? It wasn’t intended to be a duplicate vote, just a reaffirmation of my initial vote. Sorry for any confusion. ZachH007 (talk) 02:30, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Modern influence of Ancient Greece

[edit]
Modern influence of Ancient Greece (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)

Just a selective WP:CFORK assortment of other articles on Ancient Greece, doesn't actually contain any information on modern influence. Psychastes (talk) 19:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete As noted by the nominator, there is nothing explicitly discussing the influence of Ancient Greece on modern society. It's a weird collection of famous Greek places/people/ideas that are already covered elsewhere. Doesn't feel like a content fork even --- more like a wholly unnecessary reverse fork. I could imagine an article with this title being appropriate for wikipedia, but if someone wants to tackle that we can start with WP:TNT. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 23:28, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per both above. This is simply a random selection of extracts from existing wikipedia articles about ancient Greece, which largely do not address the supposed topic of the article. I raised this a while back at Talk:Modern influence of Ancient Greece#Scope but did not get a satisfactory answer. There are several existing articles on the legacy/reception of ancient Greece (the broadest-scope ones being Transmission of the Greek Classics, Classical tradition, and Classics) which cover more of the things one would expect in this article than it actually does. An article on the legacy of ancient Greece to parallel Legacy of the Roman Empire could be written – but given this doesn't contain any material not already to be found elsewhere on Wikipedia, and barely discusses the supposed topic, there's no point starting from here. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 08:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep. by definition, these iconic figures are central to Western Civilization. each section explains why. and compiling from various articles is one valid method for creating an article. --Sm8900 (talk) 20:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:10, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
StarTrekker Actually, that's not quite true. If an article has such irreparable content issues that it would be more effective to simply delete and remake the article rather than keep it, that is a valid rationale for deletion (albeit one which should not be used lightly). See WP:TNT. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 16:38, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Thurii

[edit]
Battle of Thurii (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)

Found while browsing Wikipedia:Database reports/Forgotten articles. Cannot find any books or sources that mention this supposed battle that predate the creation of this article in 2007. The only "citations" this article has are incomplete citations which just say a book title and nothing else. No authors, no year of publishing, no ISBN, nothing. And the "source" titles are extremely vague, like "History of Rome" or "Antiquity".

(Note: I know there were actual battles between Tarantos and ancient Rome for control of the area, but I cannot find evidence that "Battle of Thurii" was one of those battles, or that there was any "naval battle" for the region.) ApexParagon (talk) 00:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: The editor who created this stub seems to have been inactive on Wikipedia since 2013, but nothing on his/her talk page suggests that it was created as a hoax (I was looking for warnings of various sorts). Given that the part about Thurii is only a single sentence, while the rest concerns Rome's conflict with Tarentum, I wonder if perhaps the editor was confused about the sequence of events—perhaps including the dates. My first thought was to check the history of the cities in the Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, and see if it mentioned something similar to a battle at this time. Under "Tarentum", at p. 1097, if you scroll down the first column there's a description of Rome and Tarentum coming into conflict over Thurii, though this is supposed to have occurred in 302 BC, while the Tarentines didn't call in Pyrrhus until 281, when the Romans declared war on Tarentum.
This sounds like what the article creator had in mind, but unless the description is in error—which is possible, though it's hard to see "302" as a typo for "282" under "Tarentum"—the editor might have been confused by a less precise description such as the corresponding passage under "Thurii", top of the first column on p. 1193. I believe both are citing Appian's Samnite Wars, though additional sources are cited in "Tarentum" that might also shed light on this. I agree that the existing citations for this article are not very helpful, but thankfully knowing what sources describe the conflicts may help sort out whether there's enough here to salvage (at the very least, it can probably be merged under Thurii, Tarentum, and Pyrrhus, which would technically not be a deletion).
I expect Broughton can also be cited. I did not resort to PW, because wading through pages of densely-annotated German that I have to translate by retyping passages that I think are relevant on Google can be quite time-consuming! Not sure where else I would look besides the Greek and Roman authors cited in the DGRG, but perhaps someone else has some ideas on that. In any case, I think we can conclude that the article is not a hoax, but it might not be focused on its purported subject—Thurii—and might be better off mentioned in other articles than as a stand-alone one. P Aculeius (talk) 14:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 09:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we have an analysis of above additions?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 13:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Well, the Catalan and Italian articles also have vague sourcing, only listing a page or a book, with no isbn or any sort of online listing. I wouldn't count them as either RS or non-RS... They just look like the "good enough" sourcing that was used back in the early days of Wiki. Oaktree b (talk) 20:03, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Just not enough sourcing to keep this... The vague sources used don't really give any indication of how you'd even locate them, if they're in a book, a magazine, or anything else. One of those old Wiki articles that was "good enough" 20 yrs ago and just looks sad these days. I don't even think sending this to draft would help. I can't find sources that talk about this event... We just don't have enough fo show notability. Oaktree b (talk) 20:05, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Maybe not a hoax, but nothing has emerged to suggest that this battle is notable. Eddie891 Talk Work 10:04, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

[edit]

Categories

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Templates

See also

Archives

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Greece&oldid=1293374009"