Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roman Umistowski

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 speedy keep. Snow keep. Aside from the dreadfully worded nomination, was AfD'd -7 minutes- after creation. WP:DANNO The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Umistowski

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

Person doesn't look really interesting Mbch331 (talk) 11:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the polish users think differently; Umiastowski has a voice in the polish wikipedia. Moreover, interesting is somewhat subjective, isn't it? To an illiterate Jibaro of the Amazon basin, or to an american senator, also Shakespeare looks uninteresting. Aristofane di Bisanzio. —Preceding undated comment added 20 September 2011.

Weak Keep. Looks as though there are a bare minimum worth of references for this biography. Furthermore, the OP has not made a convincing arguement for deletion.--Jayron32 11:52, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I was vaguely going for a weak delete, however this is such a dreadfully worded nomination that I recommend this AfD is first binned as having such a bad start. Mbch331, please take some time to read up on WP:DEL. Thanks Fæ (talk) 12:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This person's name was Roman Umiastowski, but he was better known under his pseudonym Boleslaw Zarnowiecki (author of two futuristic novels), see Between Hitler and Stalin: The Quick Life and Secret Death of Edward Smigly Rydz, Marshal of Poland, Dog Ear Publishing, 2010, p. 160, ISBN 9781608445639 and many other sources at G-Books [1]. The content of our article is easily verifiable/expandable with the help of reliable English and Polish sources. Umiastowski seems to be an important personality for Polish history. I'll move the article to the correct name. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Dreadfully worded nomination aside, Vejvančický makes a good point that this person is notable as an author. I also added a note about his military position, which may be notable (head of propaganda department in the Polish High Staff in '39). The article needs expansion, and better sources, but I think it is encyclopedic. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 16:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Defective nom. Article is only 1 day old, notability already somewhat established and looks likely. North8000 (talk) 20:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It appears that the nominator may not have followed the guidelines listed in WP:BEFORE for source searching prior to nominating this article for deletion, which, if true, nullifies the basis of nomination for deletion. There's no mention in the nomination regarding the availability of reliable sources. The nomination's basis is upon opinion about the topic, rather than upon searching for reliable sources, as required per WP:BEFORE requirements. Northamerica1000 (talk) 02:29, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – per source search provided by user Vejvančický, which demonstrates topic notability. Northamerica1000 (talk) 02:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the article was originally clumsy and badly written but on a notable enough subject. Volunteer Marek 13:54, 21 September 2011 (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.