Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Petr Torak

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, the notability concerns raised prior to the relist appear to have been addressed by the post-relist argument, which is supported by sources. If these are not adequate, please open another AfD - the suitability of sources typically should be decided by a community discussion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:16, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Petr Torak[edit]

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

Member OBE is not notable by itself, and that what he was awarded. Part of a series on non notable police officers. DGG ( talk ) 00:44, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as think he is borderline notable for co-founding two organisations: one to help the Czech and Slovak community and another one to support Romany ,gypsy and traveller police officers, the reliable sources newspaper coverage cited in the article confirm the iinformation in the article.Atlantic306 (talk) 01:08, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there is still nothing actually convincing and there's also no convincing substance for a convincing article. SwisterTwister talk 01:15, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Roman are a heavily discriminated against racial minority, so much so that they are badmouthed at Holocaust memorials that should be recognizing the fact that they were the other full victims of the holocaust besides the Jews. People who would not dream of stereotyping other racial groups will stereotype Roman as a bunch of theives, cheaters and people unwilling to do real work. We have reliable sources mentioning Torak as the first Roman police officer in the United Kingdom. He has received recognition and notability for his work, and the article should be kept. It is bad enough the Roman are the most maligned ethnic group, when one has recieved real recognition for doing good, we should not delete it since he clearly is notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:47, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 01:51, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 01:51, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 01:51, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 01:52, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:25, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As well as the sources already added to the article, there's more to show he's notable. Profiles in the Daily Mail and on the Radio Prague website. Also other Czech news sites some of which may be RS though I'm not familiar with them. He's had all this attention because he's playing a unique role in British policing during a period of much public discussion about East European migrants, with Roma people in particular getting bad publicity. He's been invited to consult with the OSCE [1]and other organisations, like this. Czechs are interested in comparing with their own issues re Roma people. Also, lesser coverage in RS like a paragraph in a BBC article and the Telegraph - also several pieces in local papers [2] and Roma/Romani/traveller coverage including this big Roma news site.Lelijg (talk) 10:02, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've been looking through the sources provided by Lelijg, and I believe that Torak more than meets notability requirements. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:54, 19 August 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.