Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sultan Geliskhanov

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 keep. -- Cirt (talk) 00:42, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sultan Geliskhanov

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

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

no extensive coverage in gnews [1]. will reconsider if someone can provide substantial coverage in Russian. LibStar (talk) 08:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want someone who speaks Russian, then use the deletion sorting mechanism or ask at WP:RUSSIA, don't just express a vague desire in your summary for someone who speaks Russian to appear out of thin air. Or you could try using the Google Transliteration tool yourself. cab (call) 09:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. cab (call) 09:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. cab (call) 09:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge somewhere? I added the {{Find sources}} template above for the Cyrillic spelling. But even with the greater volume of Russian coverage, it's pretty clear this is a WP:BLP1E. The only non-trivial articles about the man were within a few days of his surrender. Everything before or after that consists merely of passing mentions in books and articles about other subjects. His surrender doesn't seem to have been a particularly important event of the Second Chechen War so I'm not sure that's an appropriate merge target. Aside from that one event, it's also verifiable that he was the head of the department of state security ([2]) under Dzhokhar Dudayev in the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria back in 1994, but I'm not sure that qualifies him as passing WP:POLITICIAN. Maybe a mention of him in a list of governmental officials of Ichkeria would be appropriate. cab (call) 09:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sourcing is terrible here, but based on the Kommersant article cited in the footnotes (in English), we know the person exists and that the general description of him as a top leader of the Chechen nationalist movement is accurate. Notability seems assured, the question being whether there are any BLP issues to be addressed. Here you will see Султан Гелисханов as the subject of coverage in the online version of Vremia. There are many other hits. Pretty clearly clears the notability bar as a top leader of the Chechen movement, poor sourcing of this article notwithstanding. —Carrite, Sept. 30, 2010.

For those of you not versed in Russian history or current events, the Chechens are a Muslim nationality within the old Russian empire, severely repressed under Stalin, who have been using terrorist methods in an attempt to achieve national sovereignty. Gelishkhanov would be regarded a "top terrorist" or a "hero of the Chechen national movement" depending on one's POV. He's notable in Wikipedia terms either way one feels. —Carrite, Sept. 30, 2010.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - perhaps need some re-writing etc .. but notable. yes it is.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:09, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ITSNOTABLE. your argument fails to address how the article meets WP:N or WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 13:02, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable top terrorist/freedom fighter. Even if the article is a stub, it will grow from translations and additions from reliable sources over time. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:59, 13 October 2010 (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.