Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dražeta
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 keep. Arkyan • (talk) 22:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Plain and simple: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a directory of (point 2) genealogical entries. Duja► 09:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - This is proposal for deletion is ridiculous. There are many articles about surnames on Wikipedia like Smith (surname) (In USA, United Kingdom...), Jovanović (In Serbia, Montenegro, etc...), not to mention many other listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Surnames Furthermore, the point 2 from the link that you showed speak about biography articles. Please tell me why Dražeta article should be deleted and articles about other surnames should not? Vampire in the city 12:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Not really. If you take a closer look, 99.9% of those articles are disambiguation pages for already existing articles about people, with perhaps a couple of sentences on the top about the origin for the most frequent surnames. Smith (surname), carried by some 50,000,000 people, is certainly a worthy exception, but there are no notable persons of surname Dražeta. Do we really want some 108 articles on each and every surname on the planet? Duja► 13:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I doubt that you calculated ALL those articles to have 99.9% - some of them are disambiguation pages (because nobody expanded them yet), but some other are not, so why you did not proposed all of them for deletion but only this one? Vampire in the city 21:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Punkmorten 20:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- So? You will delete the whole "surnames" category then or you have any criteria that decide which of those should be deleted and which should not? Please tell me which criteria that is? Vampire in the city 17:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Punkmorten 20:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I doubt that you calculated ALL those articles to have 99.9% - some of them are disambiguation pages (because nobody expanded them yet), but some other are not, so why you did not proposed all of them for deletion but only this one? Vampire in the city 21:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Not really. If you take a closer look, 99.9% of those articles are disambiguation pages for already existing articles about people, with perhaps a couple of sentences on the top about the origin for the most frequent surnames. Smith (surname), carried by some 50,000,000 people, is certainly a worthy exception, but there are no notable persons of surname Dražeta. Do we really want some 108 articles on each and every surname on the planet? Duja► 13:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I don't see this as a directory. A directory is a telephone book type entry or a yellow pages list of red links. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 16:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep family lineages are a major research point in ethnology and we should have articles about them. Rather than deleting this article, articles about other last names should be expanded to have history of the lineage and not just a list of individuals with the same last name (of course, sometimes one lineage is split into multiple last names, and sometimes one last name belongs to several lineages - that is not the point here). In addition, there are Darko Dražeta, mayor of Ston[1] and Lazar Dražeta, a biologist[2] who perhaps might be notable enough for Wikipedia. Also, same article on Serbian Wikipedia is much more detailed, talks about family migration, various mentions of the name in history and so on. Nikola 08:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I planed to translate fully this article from Serbian Wikipedia, but I do not have much time for this at the momment. Vampire in the city 21:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - notable enough and quite interesting.--Methodius 15:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, we are making an encyclopedia, not a genealogy database. Punkmorten 20:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- No? Then why there is "surnames" category in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Surnames Vampire in the city 17:15, 2 May 2007 (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.