Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosgeologiya (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:46, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rosgeologiya[edit]

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

I proposed deletion of this back in March, and the prod was removed with the article is virtually unsourced; but the entity is most certainly notable. I do understand the logic, but sadly, it was not improved. It has a single source, and I am unable to find others - of course, it is possible/likely that there are sources in another language, and per Wikipedia:Systemic bias, it would be great if others could add such. However, as it stands, I do not feel we can accurately present information on the company, without references to show notability, per WP:GNG, WP:V, WP:ONESOURCE. I also note that it is a holding company, and according to the only source we have, it is intended to incorporate others in the future - so there is an element of WP:CRYSTAL here, too. NOTE: This is a relisting, the same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosgeologiya. That was closed 'No consensus', but should almost certainly have been closed 'delete' and the closing admin agrees here, but we felt relisting made sense due to age of that, and the changes in AFD rules. Chzz ► 17:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are enough sources[1][2], so it's clearly a real and serious proposal. But WP is not a crystal ball. We should create the article after the company has been created. (Which will apparently happen in two years.) Offliner (talk) 18:17, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. If sources exist demonstrating notability of this proposal then there is nothing in WP:CRYSTAL that precludes our having an article about it. There are plenty more potential sources here: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. It's too late for me to get my head around my very rusty Russian tonight (I haven't used it in anger for over 30 years), so I'll leave it for now to others to evaluate those sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. —Phil Bridger (talk) 23:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Russian, and if sources back things up, sure, great; I was going by the comment on the previous AFD, really, stating True crystal; as of June 16, 2010 there were vague plans to form it "within two years" (in Russian). Just another govt scam. East of Borschov 19:51, 4 July 2010 (UTC) Chzz ► 05:38, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would delete the article for now and wait until the company is created or until its creation draws nearer. Proposals can change fast, and there's a big risk a little known article like this will at some point just end up containing obsolete info. Offliner (talk) 08:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:55, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:20, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is an officially announced project, with dozens of good references available in G News from reliable Russian newspapers and trade news sources. The extent of mention can be seen via Google Translate. Among the best ones are [3], [4], and [5], with very full details to expand the article. ROther good ones are [6],[7], [8] ,[9],[10] -- I've checked these, & they are substantial, though there's some duplication. Why should people assume Russian sources are unreadable even by English monoglots? DGG (talk · contribs) 23:45, 23 October 2010 (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.