Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zef Mirdita

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zef Mirdita[edit]

[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)

With an h-Index of 10, a high citation count of 38, and no qualifying positions, does not meet WP:NSCHOLAR, and does not meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. For the reasons identified by the nominator. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 12:23, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Due to the language barrier, I'm unable to check for academic reviews of his books, so I'll hold off on a !vote. From what I can see based on this and the Albanian Wikipedia article, he appears to be quite highly recognized for his contributions to the fields of Albanology and (less so) Illyrology, including having received presidential awards specifically for his contributions. Curbon7 (talk) 13:46, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment given that much of his career took place pre-internet, and he was working primarily outside the usual set of collaborating Western countries, and his expertise is in a field of limited interest to those from the UK, US or most of Western Europe, it's impressive that he is as cited as he is. If I lift his accomplishments and place them in the 21st C in North America, I think it almost certain he'd have landed a named chair, been editor of a journal, or otherwise met NPROF. We need to match our criteria to the subject. I'd be very worried about deleting him unless someone with specific knowledge of Albanian language and culture declares he's not notable in that context. My edit summary is: "don't just delete academics because they lived a long time ago, somewhere else, and we don't speak their language". Elemimele (talk) 17:12, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Albania, and Kosovo. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:29, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Am I missing something? How does he not meet WP:GNG? He's in two biographical dictionaries, and has significant coverage like this [1] (already linked on article). Since nomination, the article has been added to show his awards (like this one [2]), so it now looks to me like he passes all three criteria at WP:ANYBIO. -- asilvering (talk) 22:41, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have cited a few reviews in the article, showing a pass of WP:AUTHOR on top of the above. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:30, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Phil Bridger If you intended this as a "keep" !vote, you forgot the "keep" at the beginning, fyi. -- asilvering (talk) 17:19, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I didn't start my comment with a bolded statement of what I want to happen, not because I forgot it but because such statements lead people to treat these discussions as battlegrounds rather than discussions that should lead to consensus. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:13, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly passes WP:GNG with entries in two dictionaries and awards. Probably no pass due to GS profile and its citations but everything else is more than enough. --hroest 13:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I suspect that as a subject involving book publications in a non-global language, notability through journal citations is going to be difficult to document. But the multiple book reviews mentioned above make a borderline case for WP:AUTHOR, and inclusion in two national dictionaries and a published academic-journal obituary should be more than enough for WP:GNG. GNG-notable scholars don't lose their notability merely for not passing other notability criteria. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the sources mentioned by asilvering above. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 11:24, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep barely. Also he once thought about being an athlete and worked at an institution with a sports team, so he passes something in NSPORTS. // Timothy :: talk 01:01, 28 March 2023 (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.