Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdi İpekçi Peace Monument

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. Particularly per Chris Troutman - sources from the newspaper that the deceased worked for can't be said to be independent. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:10, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Abdi İpekçi Peace Monument

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm somewhat of two minds about this. First of all, it was created by the sock of a very prolific and very disruptive POV editor, and thus there is really no reason to not delete it stante pede per G5; on the other hand, I am loath to just delete articles. However, I do not see much evidence of this subject being notable per GNG, esp. since the best source was written before the monument was built and only spends four short sentences on it. And note that more sock expansion adds nothing that proves notability. Drmies (talk) 18:28, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:38, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:GNG. Cites sourced by major Turkish dailies. CeeGee 05:28, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per WP:G5 and WP:DENY - any marginal notability is subordinate to the need to deny recognition. I acknowledge the additions by User:CeeGee but most of the editing has been carried out by four blocked socks namely User:TheWaves, User:TheWindInTheTrees, User:PrayForPuertoRico and User:Quinton Feldberg. Just Chilling (talk) 23:08, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:52, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:02, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Two of the four citations are from Milliyet, which is the paper of the slain editor and therefore not independent. The remaining two citations aren't enough to convince me of GNG. I think making a case for DENY, even if we assume the subject is notable, is reasonable. Let some other editor start over from scratch. I don't want to reward ne'er-do-wells nor do I want to weaken our resolve to use G5 to remove these articles on sight. Chris Troutman (talk) 09:10, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, Abdi İpekçi Park is also up for deletion.Coolabahapple (talk) 07:45, 23 October 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.