Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadrealista Danas i Ovde

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. Not counting the nominator, who has been blocked as a sock. Sandstein 21:32, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nadrealista Danas i Ovde[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)

A local academic journal that had 3 issues around 90 years ago. Non-notable magazine that is admittedly local and not really appropriate for a standalone article. Spongecob Flairpants (talk) 05:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Spongecob Flairpants (talk) 05:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Spongecob Flairpants (talk) 05:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Spongecob Flairpants (talk) 05:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Spongecob Flairpants (talk) 05:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Spongecob Flairpants (talk) 05:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spongecob Flairpants (talk) 05:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Spongecob Flairpants (talk) 05:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 08:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 08:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't understand why this article has been proposed for deletion. This is not an academic journal, but a surrealist artistic magazine. It is not purely of local significance as the Serbian surrealist were one of the first groups to extend surrealism internationally. The fact that the magazine was produced 90 years ago, or that it had three issues are completely irrelevant. It is highly notable: for example, Koča Popović participation with the Serbian Surrealists got him in hot water with the stalinists, who accused him of "Trotskyism", he subsequently became a General in the Yugoslav Partisans and a major Yugoslav politician. It would make more sense to spend time improving articles than making poorly researched suggestions to delete the hard work of fellow editors.Leutha (talk) 08:00, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Based on what I saw in a search, I have the sense that this is a notable publication. However I cannot say for certain a I do not read the language (Croatian? Serbian?). Possibly (talk) 08:21, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As described in the reference which I added, this magazine included first publications of works by André Breton. Salvador Dalí, Max Ernst, Alberto Giacometti, etc. so it seems wrong to characterise it as "admittedly local". (See also footnote 1 in Bahun-Radunovic's article regarding documentation sources.) I might prefer an article on the broader activities and publications of the inter-war Yugoslavian Surrealists, but I think the republication, exhibition and journal article are enough for WP:GNG and deletion of this article would be inappropriate. AllyD (talk) 09:02, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per AllyD. I added another reference. I had no idea that Serbian surrealism was so active.Dsp13 (talk) 10:54, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY, thanks to AllyD and Dsp13's improvements. — Toughpigs (talk) 01:27, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:NOTINHERITED. That notable people published in this is not enough. What reliable source calls this journal important or significant and/or discusses its influence? Do ping me if you want to reply to me, I am happy to revise my vote but so far I don't see arguments that go beyond INHERITED nor sources that seem to discuss the journal in more than passing. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:46, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The digitised version of issue one has an academic article in both Serbian and English! Leutha (talk) 10:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nomination makes three claims to non-notability. 1) It's local (It wasn't and that wouldn't matter anyway) 2) it's 90 years old (true, but age is irrelevant) 3) There were only three issues. (I can think of a magazine that has had only two issues, but is notable anyway, The Blind Man). Vexations (talk) 12:56, 25 December 2020 (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.