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 delete. As noted in the discussion, this article has all the hallmarks of a promotional autobiography and/or undeclared paid editing, which is why I am giving less weight to "keep" opinions such as "why such a biased attitude towards Lomtadze?" or "the most worthy and living people in Kazakhstan are our President and Lomtadze." In this light, the WP:NOTPROMO arguments for deletion are compelling. Because the subject is possibly notable, a recreation of the article is possible, but this should be done by established editors without a conflict of interest and the new article should be written in a neutral tone. Sandstein 08:30, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mikheil Lomtadze (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Not a G4, but I don't see that factors have changed enough to change the results in the past AfD. Similar churnalism of an active businessman. Star Mississippi 13:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Kazakhstan. Star Mississippi 13:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Courtesy ping prior participants @Scope creep, Roy Smith, Deviloper, Oaktree b, Sandstein, Bash7oven, Chris troutman, Liz, CreecregofLife, Vaco98, and Shellwood: Star Mississippi 13:35, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

and also @MER-C, Espresso Addict, and Deb: involved at Mikhail Lomtadze who I inadvertently missed looking at AfD participants. Star Mississippi 13:37, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

fixing ping for @RoySmith as I accidentally pinged his doppelganger. And clearly should not have pinged the banned CreecregofLife. MOving too quickly before coffee this morning. Star Mississippi 21:39, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - at the moment, this is little more than a CV, created by someone with an undeclared COI (who has added so much promotional material to the article about the company that I've had to delete that as a G11). Deb (talk) 14:12, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Its more or less the same article as before, dumped mostly verbatim as a block from somewhere, with some updates to the references but it is the same kind of article, created by a UPE. It can't just appear from nowhere without some offline preparation. The references are mostly generated PR, the article fails WP:SIGCOV. No real WP:SECONDARY sources. scope_creep^Talk 14:43, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You write that the article was prepared offline, but for me it is just a translation from Russian into English with the change of sources to English. I do not see anything reprehensible in this, but it explains why all versions of the articles about Lomtadze are similar to each other.Deviloper (talk) 16:30, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As I said at the last AfD, this article (under a slightly different name) has already been deleted repeatedly and SALTed. And yet, the article keeps being re-created I suspect by undeclared paid editors. Ajgerim.batyrova created this article in a single edit and added WikiProject banners to the talk page immediately thereafter, which is not typical of newer editors. W?F refuses to spend money and chase down these rings of paid editors and I'm not clear if we're refusing this article to exist on principle. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Good afternoon to all Wikipedians! I did not expect to be back on the discussion page of the article about Mikhail Lomtadze. Last time, I gave a sufficient number of arguments about the significance of his person in Kazakhstan and already in the entire post-Soviet space, because. he expands his business to Azerbaijan and Ukraine I was accused of allegedly being associated with this person and having a vested interest in creating the article. I retreated, firstly, because it is not true, and secondly, because I consider all these accusations to be unfounded. I am pleased that someone decided to write about Mikhail again, because he and his company are for our people the same pride as, for example, Gennady Golovkin or Timur Bekmambetov, but only in business. Even the President of Kazakhstan emphasizes the importance of the company at international meetings created by Mikhail. Not to mention the personal contribution and losses of Mikhail to the bloody events of January in Almaty. I still think that the article has a right to exist. His activity is confirmed by a huge number of references to various authoritative sources and independent articles. All articles were published at different times (months and years) and the story about him is collected bit by bit. And if he himself was interested in having an article about him on Wikipedia, then he would probably hire a team of professional authors, at least and at the most he would order a bunch of new articles in the media with the necessary information. It is also unclear to me why articles about other Kazakhstani businessmen published without observing any rules and regulations of Wikipedia hang with recommendations for improvements, but no one deletes them. Look at articles about Bulat Abilov or Margulan Seisembayev. In my humble opinion, these people really have nothing to do on wikipedia. In this regard, I have a question - why such a biased attitude towards Lomtadze? Why do respected experienced administrators not give specific recommendations for improvement?Deviloper (talk) 16:16, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You also filed a Deletion Review, which endorsed the close and there was already prior consensus that he was not notable, which is why this was disruptively created under an alternate spelling. I'm not sure why you're surprised to be back here. If others should be deleted, you're welcome to propose them. WP:OSE applies. Star Mississippi 16:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You are right and I’m very sorry that I made a mistake with WP:OSE Can I ping some authors and ask them to vote for the deletion or keeping and improving article? Or I need to put it on the talk page of an article?Deviloper (talk) 17:26, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  As long as you leave a neutral note and have a good read at other pieces of WP:CANVASS, you can ping them (as I did you and the other participants above) but it might be easier to leave a note on the Talk to get the input of other editors who you may not know. You can ping the editors you do know from the Talk page as well. Star Mississippi 17:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you, Star Mississippi! Ill try to do my best Deviloper (talk) 18:25, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - likely undisclosed paid-for spam, probably yet another Wikibusines sock. MER-C 16:49, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Hello! In my little "career" on Wikipedia, this is the first time I've encountered a nomination for the removal of articles. Now I see that all my other works have also been sent to drafts. I am disappointed. When publishing my articles, I tried to follow all the rules of Wikipedia and look up to well-developed articles about personalities. I admit honestly that I took material from the Russian Wikipedia as a basis. I translated it and looked for references in English-language sources. If I found unique information, I added it. But a little. And it's not prohibited. In your takedown notice, you noted that you need to find news, newspapers, reference books , and scholars. If you follow these links, then independent sources come out. Please keep the article and I will study information further and suggest corrections. I will be grateful for your recommendations and advice - what I need to improve or redo. This is a good experience for creating new articles, because I'm interested.Ajgerim.batyrova (talk) 17:56, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The individual seems notable. Perhaps the outline can be changed to a more standard form, something like this: Education, Career, Awards & Honors, Organizations, etc.Shari Garland (talk) 04:30, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. What is the subject meant to notable for? OK, he's rich. But the article doesn't even explain how he acquired his wealth. Maproom (talk) 06:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The absence of language versions does not inspire confidence, significance is not shown. Kazman322 (talk) 07:26, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Kazman322: there are several language versions of the article that I have brought to the side language panel. I took the material from them to work on this version. If I made a mistake when forming an article, I would be grateful for help in finalizing it. I am sure that there are very responsive and kind members in the English wikipedia community. Ajgerim.batyrova (talk) 05:40, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I took advantage of @Dimadick:'s [1] recommendation - optimized a large block of information about meetings with the president and drew attention to @Maproom:'s comment - supplemented the article with information about how wealth is acquired. I suggest not deleting the article, but making it an educational example for beginners like me or the author of an article, how to bring it in the English Wiki to the required format. I would be grateful if one of the admins took control under the revision and improvement of the material. Thanks in advance! Deviloper (talk) 12:19, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note to closer be sure to check the discussion at Talk:Mikheil Lomtadze that @Deviloper: opened for any input that isn't subsequently posted here. There's some good input and I did drop a note asking them to weigh in here so their opinions were factored into the close. Star Mississippi 13:23, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete thank you for the ping. It's a well-sourced CV from what I see. Still not seeing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 16:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Deviloper linked to this AfD at the Teahouse under the heading Your vote for keeping an article. Although he asks for "honest opinions" in the section, this could potentially be considered canvassing. MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 09:26, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  It’s a mistake with the title, you are right. Thank you for noticing this. I corrected it. I hope that the essence of my appeal was conveyed correctly. I would really like to get recommendations - what needs to be done and how to improve the article and in what form it could have a chance to exist.Deviloper (talk) 12:46, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Deviloper: There's no chance for this to exist because you and your fellow undisclosed paid editors cannot host content here. It doesn't matter what you re-write or change. Please tell your client it's not happening. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia is a incredible resource where every sentence needs to be confirmed. Nothing comes out of nowhere here. Which, unfortunately, cannot be said about your unfounded accusations. WP:NPA. I have been a member and patroller of the russian language Wikipedia for over 13 years. It was interesting for me to try my hand at the English Wikipedia, practice my English and share information about Kazakhstan, but here the rules are very different, and the desire to help and advise on how and what to improve is mostly absent. I'm really sorry. Deviloper (talk) 04:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Hello to all participants of the discussion! First of all, I want to make clear that I am not the author of this article. I am brought to the discussion as the author of the last deleted translated article about Lomtadze. I am not a paid author, I sincerely like how this person makes the life of Kazakhstanis better. I edited a primitive translation of the article about Lomtadze from Russian. I suppose that it could appear as an improved article from the Kazakh Wikipedia. Apparently that's where the resume format came from. Although it may not be that important. I removed all unnecessary information, tried to rewrite it in prose, checked the sources and replaced many. I tried to find references exclusively in English, which correspond to WP:RELY I draw your attention to the fact that it did not take me much time, because there is a lot of information about him, starting from 2007. I sincerely believe that in this form the article has the right to exist. The article complies with all points of WP:GNG Before making a final decision, please check the changes. Thanks in advance Deviloper (talk) 07:44, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Oh wow! I came across this article while reading about medals and awards. To say that I am surprised by the removal of the article about Lomtadze is to say nothing! It should be kept for futher work! The most worthy and living people in Kazakhstan are our President and Lomtadze. Perfection is my second name (talk) 09:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. He is one of most notable entrepreneurs in Kazakhstan that confirmed for example by including to lists of Forbes and significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources in Kazakhstan both in Kazakh and Russian languages. --Mheidegger (talk) 07:08, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This isn't much more than a spammy CV supported by paid for press and generated PR. Given that this is the second AfD and concerns (I'd say rightfully so) regarding paid editing that the namespace might also need to be WP:SALTed. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I worked on the article, tried to rewrite it in prose, and also replaced most of the sources with English and independent ones, based on the WP: GNG, WP:SIGCOV, WP:RS. I am not a paid author, I sincerely like how this person makes the life of Kazakhstanis better. Of course, you are free to speculate, that is not my business. On the topic of this article, I stand by my earlier statement of Keep. As for me, for today the article meets the requirements of WP:BIO. I believe that the significance of the person and his contribution to the development of Kazakhstan has been proven. At the search request of Mikhail Lomtadze, we see that more than 35,000 publications made over the years are published, which indicates public interest in this person. In The Power of Trust: How Companies Build It, Lose It, Regain It by By Sandra J. Sucher, Shalene Gupta it is described Michael's leadership style in critical situations as an example to look up to. Please leave the article, I will try to refine it as independent facts are discovered and I think that many other authors will be interested in this, given the expansion of his business in Ukraine and Azerbaijan. Deviloper (talk) 13:01, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You're only permitted to !vote once in the discussion @Deviloper. Please edit this or the one at 16:16 on 17 August to a comment. Star Mississippi 13:14, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm going to say keep but the article is waaaay too promotional, both in content and in language. So I would advise that it be marked as such and that it be heavily edited to include only the information that supports notability. Lamona (talk) 05:03, 27 August 2022 (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.