Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyaram Sloyan

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. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:51, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kyaram Sloyan[edit]

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

Death of youth in a war is tragic, but not necessarily notable by Wikipedia's definition of notability. The article does not meet WP:BIO1E. Furthermore, it does not seem to meet notability as an event based on it's lack of demonstrated lasting effect. Further I cannot see how it can be said to have significant impact over a wide region, domain, or widespread societal group. A tragedy yes, but Wikipedia is not a memorial. EricSerge (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. EricSerge (talk) 16:45, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Don't see why this should be deleted. This article was sent to deletion in the first week or so of the conflict and even then it garnered nine keep opinions as opposed to just four delete. With that said, I don't know why it was closed as no consensus when there was an overwhelming consensus to keep. At any rate, my opinion hasn't changed. His life and tragic death are covered by many notable news media outlets including The Sunday Times [1], Regnum [2], EurasiaNet [3], EKurd Daily [4], Agos [5], openDemocracy [6], RFE/RL Armenia [7] and many others. His death is being investigated by the International Federation for Human Rights [8] and the case is currently a pending lawsuit at the European Court of Human Rights ([9]...this needs to be added to the article). It is also compliant with WP:SOLDIER which considers a soldier notable if s/he is "awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour". The Order of the Combat Cross is Armenia's second highest honor, and he received its first degree. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:13, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The quotation from WP:SOLDIER is "awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour (such as the Navy Cross) multiple times". How did you manage to miss the "multiple times" requirement? I have no personal axe to grind about any ethnic conflicts in the Caucasus region, but it's pretty obvious that there are several editors distorting the truth according to their personal nationalist prejudices in recent deletion discussions. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:54, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment if this is part of an investigation of a war crime, then perhaps coverage of the case against an accused individual could use some of this material. However, in reading WP:CRIME this article fails by that inclusion standard as well. EricSerge (talk) 03:57, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

People don't get awarded the Navy Cross multiple times, they receive stars. In the case of the Order of the Combat Cross, that would mean getting a 1st degree (and not merely the 2nd), which is why I mentioned it. Besides, per TonyBallioni's comment below, there's good reason to believe that this is the highest medal granted for military valour. So my vote still stands. Étienne Dolet (talk) 05:00, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop the sophistry. A star is a second or subsequent award of a Navy Cross, but a first degree of the Order of the Combat Cross is not a second award, but simply the level of the first award. Maybe, as said below, this is actually the top award for valour in Armenia, but that doesn't take away from the fact that you misrepresented WP:SOLDIER above, and so may also be misrepresenting that information. Why do you (Personal attack removed) insist on overstating your case when you have a perfectly good case even without such misrepresentation? 86.17.222.157 (talk) 00:18, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now you're just showing signs of disruption, and that's pretty concerning. Ease up on the personal attacks, will you? No one here is an Armenian nationalist. Hell, I'm not even Armenian. And I did not say he received the order twice, I said he received its first degree, which is much more significant than receiving its second degree. To clarify: getting a star for a Navy Cross is, in my opinion, more or less the same significance as it would be when receiving the Combat Cross. And again, in light of TonyBallioni's comment, which provides a pretty good conclusion as to this medal's significance, my vote still stands. Étienne Dolet (talk) 03:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:25, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:25, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the highest honor in Armenia seems to be the National Hero of Armenia award. Taking a look at its recipients it looks something like the Presidential Medal of Freedom more than a military award such as the Victoria Cross or the Medal of Honor. The medal he was awarded seems to be the nations highest military honour for enlisted soldiers, and combined with what looks to be widespread media coverage, I think he passes WP:GNG. Also, just as a note, I also have no opinion one way or the other on any of the ethnic conflicts in the former Soviet Union. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:08, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article is well sourced, sources are RS, the subject of the article is not simply the beheading but the aftermath of it. It is the aftermath that makes the subject notable - and there is demonstrable lasting effect. Many sources commented on it, notable politicians commented on it, international bodies commented on it, cases were raised at other international bodies that are still ongoing, the beheading and the related atrocities are now used as a reason to argue against Azerbaijan ever again having control of NK, etc. Note, this AfD almost certainly started because I mentioned this article in another ongoing AfD [10], giving this article as an example of what that other article would need to have to avoid deletion. Has this AfD been started in order to influence deletion of the other article? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:52, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The first degree of the Order of the Combat Cross appears to be the highest award for valour in Armenia, giving a pass of WP:SOLDIER. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:10, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesn't qualify WP:SOLDIER. All the citations are either Armenian propaganda or websites distantly talk about him. We can not have articles for each soldier died in a conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.140.194.48 (talk) 10:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning Keep -- the subject was indeed awarded the "nation's highest award for military valour" (Awards and decorations of Armenia#Order of the Combat Cross 1st Degree), and thus this is technical WP:SOLDIER #1 pass. (The Hero of Armenia is a civil award.) The coverage is sufficient to pass GNG at this time. Moreover, the award was presented by Armenia's president personally, so the subject is likely to become a propaganda icon. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:56, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems to pass WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:07, 8 October 2016 (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.