Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pavel Ustinov

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 no consensus. The keep commenters seem to be ignoring WP:BLP1E, which greatly weakens their arguments, but there is too little support for deletion to have a consensus for that. RL0919 (talk) 20:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pavel Ustinov

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Absolute insignificance by WP:NACTOR --Владимир Бежкрабчжян (talk) 04:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2022 January 25. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:36, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:19, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:20, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:20, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Isn't most of his notability derived from the beating and arrest by police, subsequent political protest that it inspired, and international coverage? — BriefEdits (talk) 06:30, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: as per nom. Why it is in AfD? It should have been put for WP:CSD directly. - Hatchens (talk) 15:35, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hatchens: Again, isn't his acting stuff pretty insignificant compared to the rest of the article which contains most of the notability? — BriefEdits (talk) 05:27, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@BriefEdits: This entity's arrest and release was a single event and we need to categorize it under WP:BLP1E. -Hatchens (talk) 05:33, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hatchens: I can see where you're coming from and as somebody not familiar with the 2019 Moscow protests, I can't really comment too much on his involvement. But the amount of coverage present (i.e. from Hollywood Reporter, the Guardian, BBC etc.) is, in my opinion, enough to pass WP:VICTIM. — BriefEdits (talk) 05:41, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@BriefEdits: If the entity is covered only for a single event then there would be always a scrutiny on its' notability as per the WP:BLP1E. But again, it all depends on how the closing admin decides on the closure of this AfD discussion. Whatever it might be - WP:BLP1E or WP:VICTIM, they are always going to have my support. -Hatchens (talk) 07:24, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Wikipedia is not a place to declare anyone a perpetrator or a victim. WP:NPOV is the founding pillar of this platform. -Hatchens (talk) 07:30, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hatchens: It's a bit of a stretch to say that I wasn't being neutral. I was just synthesizing my assessment from the sources listed in the article. Even then, I stand by my original point that the breadth of the topic and coverage is enough to pass WP:GNG. — BriefEdits (talk) 07:41, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:17, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The nomination text of "absolute insignificance" is unconvincing since he's plainly the subject of a great deal of press coverage. That appears enough to meet GNG on its own. And the "speedy delete" vote above is even dumber, there's no cause for a speedy deletion of a sourced article that is 2.5 years old and exists on three other languages wikipedias as well. Why the Russian one has been up for deletion for two years without a resolution is probably for reasons as complicated as a Dostoevsky novel. We need not take so long.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 22:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 20:21, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:51, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It seems that this person received a wave of hype from some notable Russian actors, as in the end being mediated only on the basis of protests.--Tysska (talk) 13:50, 16 February 2022 (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.