Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medal "100th anniversary of the Azerbaijani police"

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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 a lot of !votes here, but it's time to close this after a month. The article's referencing has been improved somewhat since listing, and simply clicking on the Google link in the AFD template reveals several English language sources about awarding of this medal, so I believe it meets the GNG. What it comes down to is that this is an encyclopedia, and the national awards of a country are encyclopedic knowledge based on past practice. If the filer wants to start an RFC about an SNG for national awards, they should do that. If, after an RFC, this award does not meet the SNG, it can be nominated again. Katietalk 14:17, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Medal "100th anniversary of the Azerbaijani police"

edit

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Medal "100th anniversary of the Azerbaijani police" (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article does not meet WP:GNG. WP:BEFORE did not reveal WP:RS independent of the subject that addressed the topic directly and in detail beyond WP:ROUTINE mentions.   // Timothy :: talk  12:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  12:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  12:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply Per WP:WWIN "Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful." Just because it exists does not mean it is notable. If it is clearly notable, it should be easy to produce multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject to show it meets WP:GNG.  // Timothy :: talk  10:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment a special sign issued in memory of an event, on the occasion of anniversary dates, are clearly notable!--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 18:52, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply: The keep !votes are entirely based on feeling and opinion and have failed to support the keep !votes with any policies or guidelines. Subjects are notable because they have significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent, secondary sources that addresses the topic directly and in detail WP:SIGCOV. The sources provided are not secondary sources independent of the subject. None of the keep votes has provided (or even attempted to provide) sources that meet WP:RS criteria. Its existence is not enough to prove WP:N, and it is not enough to merit inclusion. "Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful" WP:WWIN.   // Timothy :: talk  10:51, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:14, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply Elshad Iman (Elşad İman), when you say there is "no known good reason for deletion" you're ignoring the guidelines that others have stated such as WP:GNG, WP:RS, and WP:WWIN. You haven't even attempted to respond to these points, except to basically say WP:ILIKEIT and I think it should stay, so it should stay. The best advice I can offer is please take some time to read WP:N, WP:WWIN, and WP:RS, Wikipedia works based on policies, guidelines, and sources not on personal opinions. I offer this suggestion with only goodwill, it will help you be a more productive member of the community and will make your time here more enjoyable. Also many experienced editors offer to mentor individuals, you might post something at the WP:TEAHOUSE about getting a mentor to help you with notability and reliable sources; I have several I go to with questions, so I know it helps from personal experience, I'm not suggesting anything I don't already do. Another idea is thinking about getting into Wikipedia:New pages patrol/School (this isn't new page patrol, but the principles cross over). If you can backup your positions with policies, guidelines and sources, you'll be much more effective here and it will help build a consensus instead of everyone just going back and forth. Best wishes and again I offer the suggestions in goodwill.   // Timothy :: talk  19:35, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Those suggesting notability should probably explain which sources, policies, or guidelines, support their assertion that this article should be kept rather than merely asserting it as a national medal.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:10, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply State awards like this are clearly notable and have been held to be notable at AfD in the past. Sources clearly prove its existence. which they all agreed. Article on state awards with official sourcing, it's past time for an RFC on the topic.
As per DESiegel, I believe that we should treat officially established awards and medals given out by a nation as being notable if reliable sources, including official sources, prove that they exist and are indeed official national awards. I can't and any previous discussion on this, or any relevant guideline, but it seems to have been longstanding practice. I think this is a case where an argumetn based on WP:OSE is in fact valid, as a matter of precedent. I set before you Category:Military awards and decorations by country and its many sub cats such as Category:Military decorations and medals of South Africa. A few examples, taken from that cat, are Ad Astra Decoration, Closure Commemoration Medal, Colonial Auxiliary Forces Officers' Decoration, Distinguished Conduct Medal (Natal), Efficiency Decoration (South Africa), Good Service Medal, Bronze iPhrothiya yeBhronzi and from other national categopries Cross of Honour and Military Merit, Order of Bohdan Khmelnytsky, Order of Danylo Halytsky, Order For Courage, and Turkish Armed Forces Medal of Distinguished Service. These are all supported largely or solely through official sources. Ther should probably be an SNG on this topic, but I think this is as good a place as any to start one, as SNGs ususlly start with practice.--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 17:35, 24 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Medal_%22100th_anniversary_of_the_Azerbaijani_police%22&oldid=1142285976"