Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ofer Levi

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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:56, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ofer Levi[edit]

Ofer Levi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reviewed during new page patrol. No indication of notability under GNG or SNG. Given references are all himself (his website, facebook page, itunes page etc.) except for IMDB listing which lists a few small parts. I did a search and couldn't find anything else. North8000 (talk) 01:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then why not put some independent sources in that cover him in depth, which is what matters here? North8000 (talk) 11:39, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I gave three sources above. Here another three: [1][2][3]. There's probably enough source to write Ofer Levi and COVID-19! And that's ignoring his 30+ year very famous career before COVID even showed up.חוקרת (Researcher) (talk) 11:45, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Iconic Mizrahi singer.--Geewhiz (talk) 15:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reconsider given the improvements to the content of the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:20, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Sources found indicate sufficient notability MaxnaCarta (talk) 02:24, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Gidonb and the sources found by חוקרת, which are better than what is currently supporting some other international artist articles out there, such as Patrick Hernandez and Nico & Vinz. Havradim leaf a message 08:11, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I suggest that folks who nominate articles or vote for deleting the same, do a bit more research. If language is a major obstacle for such research, then just do not nominate/vote. This a very unnecessary nomination. gidonb (talk) 03:06, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't say that I fully agree with your sentiment. This is, after all, the English Wikipedia. Spurious articles are being written all the time, and it can be harder for an Anglophone to separate the wheat from the chaff when there is something of a language barrier. But AfD is vital to this project similar to what a waste management system is to a bustling city. We are merely some of the many line workers plucking out the random lost jewel from the trash. I actually think that something like this would resonate with millions of people around the globe if only they knew what the words meant (and assuming they could ever develop a taste for the genre that is). Havradim leaf a message 06:31, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is no requirement to submit AFDs all the time. AfDs serve an important purpose but only after a thorough WP:BEFORE is done. There are many folks here who manage to work across languages and write meaningful opinions about sources in languages they do not know. That's wonderful! If you're not one of them, then it is better not to submit AfDs for foreign biographies, geographies, and organizations or even !vote on such topics. gidonb (talk) 10:37, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The nominator noted that this was surfaced during NPP and also their reasons for the nomination, which were sound. The article had issues, search didn't unearth English language sources for enwiki inclusion. I see no issue with the nomination whatsoever. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:43, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The math at NPP is that the ten most active reviewers need to manually review about 500 articles per day in their available wiki-minutes with 1,000,000 editors generating articles. I don't have empathy for complaints by someone in the "1,000,000" group that can't be troubled to put their complained "sources exist" sources into the article. Doubly so when the sources are in a non-english language and character set which they understand and are 20 times harder for a NPP'er to search than the person doing the complaining. North8000 (talk) 14:45, 15 June 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.