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.
Comment Just half-assedly dumping "Greek Kyrgyzstan" into Google News gets you thousands of GHits which tells you nothing about the availability or non-availability of sources, especially since Google performs stemming on all search queries (so "Greek" gets treated as Greece). Sources, if available, will likely be in Russian. So far what I have located is just a mention about the Kyrgyz Russian Slavic University working with members of the Greek diaspora in Kyrgyzstan to set up a Greek cultural center [2]. Will keep searching. cab (talk) 00:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after spending some time to do a proper search, I couldn't find many additional non-trivial sources about Greeks in Kyrgyzstan, just this one-paragraph piece about the decrease in the number of Greeks in Kyrgyzstan, and some interviews with prominent people of Greek origin in Kyrgyzstan like this, which are mainly focused on the individuals in question and don't say much about the Greek community as a whole. cab (talk) 01:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure I still maintain that articles about the "special settlers" are better covered with regional-level rather than country-level articles, as with Koryo-saram (Koreans). Especially since none of the sources actually takes Greeks in Kyrgyzstan as its main topic. However I don't know anywhere to merge it at the moment. cab (talk) 01:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteWikipedia is not a directory listing articles with every bilateral combination of persons from country X who live in country Y. A few incidentals in newspapers does not establish that such article are encyclopedic, and the references do not satisfy WP:N. Edison (talk) 03:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. I'm really starting to get angry! I don't understand this hasty delete nominations of the Greeks in x or z country nominations! People nominate articles without conducting any prior research; people vote without conducting a simple google search or without getting acquainted with the topic! I don't understand that! I really don't understand that!!! The article is clearly notable, since the Greek community of Kyrgyzstan is linked to the merchant community of imperial Russia (some of them deportated to Siberia during World War II, and then settled to Kyrgyzstan), and to the Pontian Greeks who settled to the country. I started expanding the article, and I'll keep doing it, and I declare that I am determined to keep it. There are many deletes votes, but I don't know if the people who voted had any idea of what I now state, or if they were interested in learning about this important community. And, of course, PMK1 this article was not created for the sake of it! And an important and historical community, BlueSquadronRaven is not mere statistics!--Yannismarou (talk) 09:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think you are overexaggerating the case here. Stalin's "special settlers"—deported nationalities including Koreans, Germans, Greeks, etc.—mostly ended up in Kazakhstan (with the exception of some groups from the Caucasus who were settled in Kyrgyzstan). Even after their freedom of movement was restored, Kyrgyzstan was not a popular destination. Writing an article full of generic citations about Greeks in Central Asia and assuming the content applies equally to Greeks in Kyrgyzstan (when many of these studies are written on the basis of Greeks in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan) is not really a good structure ... an overview article of "Greeks in Central Asia" may be more appropriate (see e.g. Koryo-saram which I created some years ago; up to now I haven't broken these off into separate by-country articles, simply because there's lots of shared history and details, but little content which differs by country). cab (talk) 11:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am not using "generic citations about Greeks in Central Asia and assuming the content applies equally to Greeks in Kyrgyzstan". Yes, the communities in Kazakhstand and Uzbekistan were larger, but this does not mean that there is not a story worth telling for the community of Kyrgyzstan as well! Deportation, migration back to Greece, current status are issues good enough for a short but interesting and notable article. I know that the general context of the sources is not focused on Kyrgyzstan, but there is data, info, statistics etc. for this community as well. And this is what I use. And sources do say that in early 1990s there was a community in Kyrgyzstan with a past, a history, a present, and a story to tell the world!--Yannismarou (talk) 11:17, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Update. Further sources and info are added, always focused on Kyrgyzstan (no "generic citations" as it was inaccurately told). I think that the article comprehensively informs us now when, how, and where these people settled there.--Yannismarou (talk) 13:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, If you can provide Reliable Sources then there should be no objection to its deletion. However the artice failed to meet notability and maybe your edits will create notability. I wouldn't get angry over it ;-). PMK1 (talk) 01:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I noticed some improvement since the article was nominated (there are some wording issues that should be addressed) and I think it has enough substantial sourced info now for it to be kept. I found it pretty interesting and I'm sure others will as well. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 15:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "besides the source listed in the article I've found no other sources relating to this topic" is not a valid argument for deletion. It is just nonsensical. There are already enough sources listed. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At the time of the nomination, there were almost no sources cited [7] and the ones cited were quite trivial, so the nominator's argument is not "nonsensical". He may not have reviewed this nomination since that time. cab (talk) 01:18, 8 May 2009 (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.