Wikipedia:Sletningsforslag/Klemen Pisk

You don't have to delete this. check Klemen Pisk's homepage www.klemen.pisk.net (Skrev Klemensas (diskussion • bidrag) . Husk at signere dine indlæg.)

It seems the Wikipedia article has been created with self promotion in mind. - Kåre Thor Olsen (Kaare) 25. okt 2009, 19:28 (CET)

why do you think so? If a person published more than 10 books, and also in Poland, Slovakia and USA, the only criterium is if he deserves to have an article if its self promotion or not? But it's not. The article is also written in Eskimo language, Sorbian and many other languages who have less than 100 000 speakers. The intention was to make an article also in less popular languages. And of course also in bigger languages like Danish. But I guess there is a problem to have it in Danish? it will exist in Eskimo language, but unfortunately not in Danish. This is respect for the languages, not self promotion.

First it was an article in English and German, there was no problem, no one talked if it should be or not, because everyone could see the books ISBN etc., but now because the article is also in small languages its already a promotion? It is also in Faroese language. So tell me, if someone respects small languages such as Faroese, is he making a big promotion or maybe only respecting the language which is not much respected. So people should have an article only in English and a few big languages, but not in Danish, not to mention Faroese ... (Skrev Klemensas (diskussion • bidrag) . Husk at signere dine indlæg.)

The intention is clearly an attempt to use Wikipedia to make the author internationally notable. Trying to disguise it is as respect for minor languages is ridiculous. - Kåre Thor Olsen (Kaare) 25. okt 2009, 21:43 (CET)

Then why was this not a problem before when it was only in English and German? (Skrev Klemensas (diskussion • bidrag) . Husk at signere dine indlæg.)

The different languages have different rules og standards. You can not always expect that just because something is allowed in one language it is allowed in all. --Dannebrog Spy 25. okt 2009, 22:42 (CET)

That's true, that differend languages have different rules, but the main, fundamental reason, why you want to delete the article, was the French discussion and French suggestion. If you take a look at French discussion, you can see that the problem was not the author's credibility (administrators cheked it and they couldn't deny it), but the fact that someone should not deserve to have an article in so many languages. Article was marked as a spam only because of the fact, that it appeared in more than 50 languages. At the beginning, when it was present in only a few languages, the article was already accepted, no one was discussing about the author's credibility, the article became problematic later when it appeared in so many languages. I'm asking you why would be an effort to translate an article in other languages punished? Why is this automatically treated as a spam and promotion, and not as an respect for lanuages such as Faroese, Basque, Icelandic... and also Danish and other bigger languages, which are also not in such good position as French and English? Let me stress again, that the article and author's credibility was not problematic at the begining, but when it appeared in many languages. If you delete it, you don't actually consider author's credibility and discuss about it, but the only criterium for you is, if it's promotion or not, and that is not good criterium (especially not for a poetry which is not a mass popular thing). If you delete it, you don't respect an effort to make the article available in so many languages. Nowadays, when many languages are dying out, it would be a bad sign for people who work hard on translations. I would understand the delete for credibility reasons, but about them there was no discussion here. (Skrev Klemensas (diskussion • bidrag) . Husk at signere dine indlæg.)

It is worth noting that the only source given for the content of the article is your own homepage. That is a very biased source for adding selfpromotion on many wikis. --Sir48 (Thyge) 26. okt 2009, 12:44 (CET)

To Klemen: Can you provide a link to an independent biography, or to a review of your work (books or poems or ...). Unfortunately, few people reading Danish Wikipedia understand Slovenian. Nillerdk 26. okt 2009, 12:55 (CET)

Here are indepedent links, 1. interview in Finnish magazine: http://www.helsinki.fi/jarj/rupla/kopeekka/arkisto/2006_3/klement_pisk.htm 2. interview in Lithuanian magazine: http://www.culture.lt/lmenas/?leid_id=3185&kas=straipsnis&st_id=12607 3. Invitation to a performace in Slovene embassy in Bratislava, Slovakia http://www.bratislava.embassy.si/index.php?id=1330&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=2856&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=24&cHash=825d0f58ef 4. http://books.google.com/ (If you write "Klemen Pisk" you get 165 matchs (many articles and more than 10 books which have ISBN number) 5. Report of performance in Poland http://www.kns.us.edu.pl/kns/aktualnosci/099.html and many many more ... I know you don't understand Slovene, Polish, Finnish or Lithuanian, but you can use google translte and common sense. (Skrev Klemensas (diskussion • bidrag) . Husk at signere dine indlæg.)

Artiklen har fået påsat sletteskabelon af Bruger:Biŋhai 20. oktober. Om den skal slettes, bør vist diskuteres. Klemen Pisk har artikler på mange sprog, tilsyneladende uden problemer.

Neutral - --Arne (Amjaabc) 25. okt 2009, 19:48 (CET)
Kommentar - Jeg har efterfølgende opdaget, at artiklen er blevet slettet på fr-wiki efter følgende diskussion: fr:Discussion:Klemen Pisk/Suppression, som jeg med skam at melde ikke kan følge fuldt ud; blot se, at den blev slettet med ret snæver marginal. --Arne (Amjaabc) 25. okt 2009, 19:54 (CET)
Slet - Internationalt spam iflg. den nævnte fr:-side. --Sir48 (Thyge) 25. okt 2009, 20:40 (CET)
Kommentar Ultra kort referat af fr:Discussion:Klemen Pisk/Suppression: Det lader til at Pisk har en vis form for notabilitet, men der er blevet sat en gigantisk cross-wiki-kampagne igang for at få oprettet artiklen på noget nær 57 wikier, alle sammen af de samme få brugere. Knud Winckelmann 25. okt 2009, 20:44 (CET)
Behold Det er ikke forbudt at oprette en artikel på mange sprog. Manden har fået udgivet mindst 8 bøger og en af dem er blevet kåret til årets bog i Slovenien. Jeg vil mene at det opfylder vores relevanskriterier. Artiklen er efter mit skøn saglig og neutralt skrevet. Sproget er mindst på højde med vores gennemsnitsniveau - det ligner ikke en "Google". Selvom artiklerne tydeligvis er oprettet for at promovere sig selv skal vi dømme artiklen på basis af dens indhold og ikke af afsenderen. Nillerdk 25. okt 2009, 20:59 (CET)
Slet - Promoveringskampagne, som Wikipedia ikke er sat i verden for at støtte. - Kåre Thor Olsen (Kaare) 25. okt 2009, 21:34 (CET)

Hvordan vurderer du artiklen? Hvordan forholder du dig til bogudgivelserne og bogprisen? Nillerdk 25. okt 2009, 21:52 (CET)

Problemet er at de ting netop ikke fremgår af artiklen. Gjorde de ville det hjælpe gevaldigt. --Dannebrog Spy 25. okt 2009, 22:42 (CET)

Slet -- Bruger:Wegge 26. okt 2009, 13:06 (CET)

Hej Wegge! OK, hvad er din begrundelse? Nillerdk 26. okt 2009, 13:54 (CET)

At jeg mener den skal slettes. -- Bruger:Wegge 26. okt 2009, 14:04 (CET)

Neutral − Jeg kan ikke bestemme mig. Artiklen ser nogenlunde neutral ud, og hvis man har udgivet 8 bøger, hvoraf de alle er oversat til flere sprog og den ene ovenikøbet har vundet titlen som årets bog i Slovenien, må man da være relevant. Men hvis vi er ude i noget lignende Nguyen Van Hung-problemet igen, vil min stemme blive ændret til Slet. mvh Christian Giersing ^{[ disk // bidrag // e-mail ]} 30. okt 2009, 16:52 (CET)
Slet Der er vist tale om en masseoprettet artikel. Jeg har lige haft min bot til at opdatere interwiki "(robot Fjerner: ar, be, bg, bn, ca, cs, eu, fi, ga, he, hy, ja, ko, lt, no, pt, ru, sk, sv, tr)" og lidt før var en anden bot forbi "(robot Fjerner: en:Klemen Pisk, tg:Клемен Писк, zh:克莱门·皮斯科)". Så godt nok fandtes artiklen på mange sprog, men den er slettet mange steder. --MGA73 5. nov 2009, 18:23 (CET)
Slet Har lige fjernet hr og zu fra iw-listen, da de også er blevet slettet. Jeg mener der er tale om cross-wiki spam. --Sasha 7. nov 2009, 21:21 (CET)

Konklusion:

Slettes. Alle undtagen én, der afgav en ikke-neutral stemme ville have den slettet. --Masz 19. nov 2009, 16:02 (CET)