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 excellent rewrite. - FrancisTyers · 15:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The assassin of King George I of Greece does not seem independently notable. He gave less than 30 Google hits [1] [2] (even considering that his given name is Aleksander or Alexander, not Aleksandar[3]), none of which seems to give much information besides the fact of the regicide itself. Even considering his motivation, Wikipedia (on the King George article) seems to be at odds with the rest of the web, where mentions as "deranged" or "lunatic" were vastly more usual than "Macedonian liberation fighter" (Macedonian nationalism at work?). Thus, unless somebody has more reliable information, the article should be deleted since its content is adequately covered with King George himself. --Huon 15:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep rewritten, sourced version, move to Aleksander Schinas. --Huon 09:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, yes, the content is covered by the article on King George, but it detracts nothing from the quality of Wikipedia on having a separate article on his assasin as well. A redirect to that page could be fine as well I guess, but if somebody doing a search on Aleksandar Schinas specifically, I think it's easier to find the information you need if he has his own article rather than being mentioned in passing in a larger article. Mackan 16:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep we'd keep an article on a king. And there are fewer Regicides than Regies, so to speak. Dlyons493 Talk 16:38, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. bogdan 16:52, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep most assassins are notable; see Sirhan Sirhan, John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, Gavrilo Princip, etc., etc. -- those who are remoter in time no less so but remoteness in time will explain the lack of Ghits. Carlossuarez46 20:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep cause number of google hits is a terrible proxy for encyclopedicity. Aaronbrick 21:00, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep. Political assassins are notable and articles about them are encyclopedic. Google is not a binding test and the number of hits are biased against the event because it happened in 1913. Hopefully it can be expanded and sourced. SliceNYC 21:49, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Rewritten, with source, this time. bogdan 09:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The rewritten version is vastly better than anything I believed possible, and an obvious keep. Thanks, bogdan! --Huon 09:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• keep correct The rewritten version is indeed very well written. Contrib bogdan has an obvious talent to write. Nevertheless are the references not linking to any path, which might verify their existence. Especially in matters of origin of Schimas. I am for keeping this article in form of the previous version until a credible proove is submitted. --J. Cosmos 10:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, if you have access to the NY Times archives, you can check them by yourself. Or, if you do not trust me and think I made these things up, I can upload the articles on Wikipedia. bogdan 10:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• BTW, all the articles say tha Schinas was a Greek, not that he was a Macedonian or anything else. bogdan 11:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello bogdan. Thanks for uploading those articles. But to cite the NYT for a reliable source I find rather ridiculous. Even now, 100 years since then, the average american could not point out Europe on a map if they saw it, let alone in the far 1913 to divide ethnicities. Further, those uploaded articles, if you take a good look, do NOT say, Schinas was a Greek. The first definitely does not and the second has no relevance to any name. So it could be - yes, a portugese pirate as you said on my disc.page. I can see that it in fact IS the origin of Schinas that disturbs you. So the other infos that you pointed out might be kept but - in the matter of the origin it is still a dispute. Accordingly I am changing that remark to the previous, as it is a defile, until a really reliable source is found. --J. Cosmos 12:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, and please don't change sourced information, and don't remove the reference. If you think it is incorrect, go find another reference to support your view. up+l+and 13:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  sourced infos should stay! Of course. Please take a look at the alleged sources and you will find that no information about the origin of Schinas is mentioned. Thank you. --J. Cosmos 13:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  The articles say he was a "Greek subject" (i.e. a Greek citizen). They don't mention which were his origins (he may have been a Macedonian, but we need a source for that). However, we know that he named the Greek people, "his countrymen". bogdan 14:07, 3 August 2006 (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.