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The result was keep (withdrawn). WODUP 05:27, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Farid Babayev[edit]

Does not meet WP:BIO. Though a top member of a Russian opposition party, [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Farid+Babayev%22&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rl0 z=1B3GGGL_enUS240US240 only 29 Google hits]. Even he source for the article says he was not expected to win a seat in the Duma because of his party's low standing in the polls. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 13:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep Arrg. Sorry for wasting everyone's time. Don't agree with the consensus, but that probably just means I'm wrong. speedy keep. Nom withdrawn in the face of overwhelming keeps. Next time I'll consult with someone more knowledgeable before bringing a Russian pol here. Thanks y'all for showing me the error of my ways. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 14:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What Google are you looking at? On Google News he is the main subject of stories by IHT [1] and Washington Post [2]. For this Google search [3] it turns up 172 entries. Most certainly a keep. -- Fuzheado | Talk 15:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weird. I get like 10 Unique googles on the web following link referenced by Fuzheado. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 02:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In Russia, sources find you! [4] cab (talk) 07:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Numbers of ghits don't matter - if there are a couple of good quality ones, which has been well demonstrated, that's enough to make him notable. And, as cab demonstrates, doing a search in the Latin alphabet for a Russian isn't going to give a true reflection of how much there is about him on the Internet. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep obviously, a top member of a Russian opposition party is notable. the sources are quite sufficient. WP is not based upon google. DGG (talk) 20:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
COmment Agree that Google is not the only thing. I was under the impression he was notable only for being shot. If that's not the case, will probably change to keep. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 23:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- To comment further, number of google hits does not translate to notability. The ones I saw seem to attest to a lack of notability. See the difs already cited. <5% of the vote is notable? Head of a not notable party is notable? What part did he head and is it notable? Has he held an elected office?? Is it one regarded as automatically meeting notbility requirements? Are Russian language web hits Verifiable sources?? Will make a more thorough review of the information availble before this closes. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 07:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sorry, y'all. I just don't see it. If someone can show me verifiable, reliable sources that show he was more than a regional leader of a minor party, I would be glad to withdraw. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 08:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletions. —Phil Bridger (talk) 09:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
comment I was asked to have another look., but it confirms my feeling that it should be kept, and I expanded the article somewhat, based on the information from Reuters, certainly a reliable source. Though in a minority party, he is apparently the head of their list. The leader of a party expected to win even 5% of the vote is significant, though an ordinary losing candidate would not be. If he is not in the main article for the party, he should be. DGG (talk) 10:23, 24 November 2007 (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.