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 no consensus. On the face of it a consensus to at least redirect, but considering that what seem to be relevant sources were added at the very end, I think that "no consensus without prejudice to renominate" is more appropriate.  Sandstein  17:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Rita Epik[edit]

Maria Rita Epik (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)

Delete: as non-notable singer. Quis separabit? 01:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• No reasoning for deletion.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:54, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non-notable singer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:18, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• No reasoning for deletion.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:54, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete had she actually gone on to perform at Eurovision then WP:NMG would have been met. However, as Turkey withdrew from the contest then I am swaying more Redirect to Turkey in the Eurovision Song Contest rather than deletion. Wes Mouse ^Talk 11:35, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Has obviously been part of a political boycott. sources are available to be added. bad shape article but that is not a reason for deletion, articles can and should be fixed. We do not evaluate article standard but article notability. also per WP:GNG.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:54, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@BabbaQ -- as the nominator, I take offense at "Has obviously been part of a political boycott", and am equally confused as to what you are talking about. If you wish to debate the quality or wisdom of the nomination, that is one thing; throwing around nonsensical accusations of political bias is quite another. Quis separabit? 18:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Rms125a@hotmail.com - And I should not "take offense" to your rationale for deletion? "Delete: as non-notable singer." - what is that? Come one. And for the rest of your comment, it is just nonsense. Come up with a better rationale for deletion instead of throwing a tantrum. BabbaQ (talk) 17:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@BabbaQ: No, you shouldn't take offense at me because I did not initiate this squabble by claiming you had a "political boycott" in an AFD you had initiated as the motive for this AFD, which it is not. I nominated Irwin Smigel for deletion, so am I anti-Jewish American dentists?? You basically accused me of bigotry and I should bring this entire incident to ANI for an admin opinion.

And as far as not understanding what "non-notable singer" means, while I wouldn't have thought that difficult to understand, as everyone else seems to understand it, I will spell it out for you: She does not, IMO, meet the threshold for notability as her entire career -- according to her article which as far as I know you have not bothered to update or improve in any way since the AFD started -- consists of NOT appearing (for whatever reasons) at "the first ever Eurovision Song Contest hosted by Israel". And what she would have sung ("Seviyorum") had she shown up is irrelevant. Quis separabit? 21:53, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you nominate an article about a boycott, how can you then interpret a rationale about boycott as directed to you. The comment was not directed at you but to the article subject. Your response was aggressive and bad faith and I will not respond to this anymore. P.S I am Swedish. BabbaQ (talk) 17:29, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The article is about somebody who was entitled to represent her country in Eurovision Song Contest. She is notable enough. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 14:59, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:03, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:03, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 12:21, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Eurovision involvement and also, looking at timeline, we will need to find pre-google sources to do a lot of work here, so again, an example of quality versus notability. Notability is met. Montanabw^(talk) 07:01, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • As soon as the AfD is closed some improvements can absolutely be made.BabbaQ (talk) 17:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@BabbaQ, well you're no Dolph Lundgren or Isabella Rossellini conversationally, so I guess I misunderstood you. I thought you were imputing to me an attempt to AFD ("boycott") the article because of the subject's nationality (Turkish). Evidently I misunderstood that but you could have been a lot clearer. Sorry. I did not nominate an article about a boycott; I nominated an article about an insufficiently notable singer. The boycott incident which kept her from performing at the Eurovision Song Contest in Israel is mildly interesting but nowhere near compelling enough to push her over the threshold to notability, IMO. Yours sincerely, Quis separabit? 21:19, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Nothing shows that the subject meets WP:ENTERTAINER criteria.--Rpclod (talk) 13:40, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per what?BabbaQ (talk) 23:11, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as there's literally only significance and a known status for this one contest, and nothing else, so not only suggesting there would only be such attention for this, but that there's nothing else for actual notability in any other capacity, regardless of whether she won or not. SwisterTwister talk 07:58, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pure, IDONTLIKE. Eurovision is the largest music contest on television in the world. Sources are available. You might not be a Eurovision fan but that is irrelevant.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:43, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep  No evidence has been provided by any of the delete !votes that WP:BEFORE D1 establishes a preliminary notability concern.  One statement that at first appears to be a "weak delete" restates the bolded comment to explain that it is now a redirect argument.  Nor has WP:BEFORE B6 been mentioned.  Please ping me if a WP:BEFORE D1 argument is proposed.  Unscintillating (talk) 00:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Turkey in the Eurovision Song Contest Over here it seems the event is more notable that the singer. Accordingly this should be redirect per WP:NOPAGE and WP:BIO1E. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Turkey in the Eurovision Song Contest - This definitely does not seem to meet WP:BLP1E - it was not a significant event and there has not been a significant career developed after the contest to meet WP:GNG and WP:BLP guidelines.--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per WP:CHEAP. Right now, she is nothing more than a "could have been a contender". It's tragic, but not notable. By the way, Turkey is a Muslim-majority secular country, but is not an Arab nation. Bearian (talk) 23:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Adding a couple of sources now, including a 2007 profile article. Note that I needed to use a Proquest search to locate sources, I'm fortunate to have access. Searches look very different to editors not connected to powerful search engines,. If I could change the world....sigh

• Not claiming that this is the most elegant WP:HEYMANN I've ever done, but there was significant attention paid to her career in English back in 1979, and by Turkey's national English-language daily newspaper in recent years.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:53, 6 December 2016 (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.