Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saša M.Savić

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. $Salvio$ 12:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Saša M.Savić[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)

This is a long-running autobiography project; see the talk page for details. In trying to clean this up, I have come to the conclusion that deletion, then waiting for an independent editor to create a neutral version, is the best option. There may be sources out there; at one point someone uploaded news scans that were then deleted from commons as copyright violations. As it stands, most included sources are primary source fact checks. I cannot find sources and question whether the notability is there, especially given the long-term personal promotion, which clouds the assessment of the claims. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The sourcing does not make any sense - the ref's seem to point to things other people accomplished. With the exception of the article scan of a local news article, the sources simply do not support notability. With autobiographies it's very difficult to distinguish fact from fantasy. A google search for his name + the word art turns up nothing (there are more than one person named Saša M.Savić). I doubt he meets WP:ARTIST or WP:GNG. Netherzone (talk) 02:22, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:30, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:30, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this looks like an advert - unsurprisingly, since it's an autobiography. Guy (help!) 13:07, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per non, PR --Devokewater @ 15:41, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment He is a genuine artist, albeit fairly minor, i.e. a fresco artist and iconographer, you just need to look at the work and while I'm sympathetic to the delete arguments, the article itself has only had one sock dealing with it, so even the revision history not that bad. It can be cleaned up and suitable references found. He is a Serbian artist, so a simple search on Google Books, isn't going to find much. scope_creep^Talk 20:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Scope creep, it was created and most of the content written by the subject. Guy (help!) 22:05, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- I do not know if he is notable or not. The problem is with sourcing for a BLP article. If sources were uploaded to WP Commons and then deleted, those sources would have been citable, so that the content would be verifiable, rather than verified. As Serbian emigrant to Cyprus, sources will be in Greek or Serbian, so that googling is liable to miss its target. Another problem is that the author is clearly not a native English speaker, as shown by the use of the present tense where a past tense would be more appropriate. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:49, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Peterkingiron, since it's an autobiography, one supposes that he could have chosen to do that had he wished to. Guy (help!) 22:06, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete we really have to do more to rid Wikipedia of autobiographies.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:24, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there are almost no sources that discuss the subject. It will say: Subject studied with professor X and then link to X's biography where the subject is never mentioned.
- [1] no mention of Savić
- [2] no mention of Savić
- [3] no mention of Savić
- [4] no mention of Savić
- [5] no mention of Savić
- [6] no mention of Savić
- [7] no mention of Savić
- [8] brief mention of an unfinished freco by Savić (in Bosnian)
- [9] interview with Savić (in Bosnian)
- [10] scan of article in the Cyprus Weekly on commons
- [11] deleted, likely same as previous
- [12] no mention of Savić
- [13] no mention of Savić
- [14] dead link
- [15] no mention of Savić
- [16] no mention of Savić
- [17] no mention of Savić Vexations (talk) 21:11, 5 August 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.