Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Igva

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 Delete. I'm comfortable deleting the article at this point because relisting it only garned one extra !vote. Deathphoenix ʕ 15:38, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Igva[edit]

Procedural nom. I see some problems with this entry, but it's certainly not unsalvagably incoherent or a G1 speedy as the nominator claimed so I am listing here instead. I need to get an idea if there's a place this can be merged to (per WP:FICT) or if it's verifiable to begin with (if it's not, it should be deleted). I'm not sure how notable the author is either, which is kind of important for the relevence of this entry. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Roza Mira My Russian is beginner level, but I think [1] is pretty clear (20,300 google hits for a supressed Russian author isn't bad, and they do appear to be about him, from a random sample.) So I'd say the author is notable. The problem with this article is that it's longer than the article about the book Roza Mira. This content should be merged into that article. There is much longer article about the book on the Russian wikipedia. The book was supressed and not translated until 1997, so evaluating its notability in English is sort of dicey. It would take me some time with the dictionary to verify that the Igva article isn't nonsense using the Russian one. (Might be good practice though.) There is no link to an article about 'Igva' from the Russian article however. Dina 13:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm also not seeing the words for UFO or alien in the Russian plot summary so I suspect the second half of this article is original research and needs to go. Dina 13:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, don't merge. This topic is not that important to Roza Mira, and therefore I can't see any reason to keep it around, even as a redirect. Mango juice^talk 16:43, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mango juice^talk 16:43, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Mangojuice--Peta 06:03, 27 September 2006 (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.