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. John254 22:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Teodor Keko (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article is unreferenced, so it fails wikipedia's most fundamental policy, of verifiability. The edit screen for creation of a new article clearly warns editors that unreferenced material may be deleted, and this article has been tagged as unreferenced since June 2006, which is quite long enough for references to be have been added. However, they haven't been added, and after 21 months it's time for this article to be deleted as unverified. A new article on the subject may of course be written in future, if it is referenced to met WP:V and to establish notability.

I PRODded the article, but the PROD was removed with only the comment "decline prod", so I am bringing it to AFD — the problems have not been fixed.--BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was I who declined the prod. I did so because its author, PDH, who is no longer with us, was one of the finest editors we've ever had, and in my opinion any article that she saw fit to create is prima facie encyclopaedic, and should not be deleted simply because she is not here to defend it. I am satisfied now that this has come before the wider community. I myself have no comments to make on the merits of the article. Hesperian 02:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Notable author and journalist. He also held public office in Albania.[1][2][3] Articles needing work is not a reason to delete. AlbinoFerret (talk) 02:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please read WP:V#Burden_of_evidence: "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material". With all due respect to late PDH, she didn't do great work in creating an unref article, and while I'm happy rate contributors by their contributions, the corollary of rating contributions by the contributor is a poor form of assessment, as this unreferenced article demonstrates.
    WP:V#Burden_of_evidence also says "Any edit lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors may object if you remove material without giving them a chance to provide references" and "Do not leave unsourced information in articles for too long" ... but this one has had two years. By all means improve the article if you can to establish that it meets verifiability and notability thresholds, but right now it fails. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Re: PDH, she's not dead, she just doesn't contribute much any more. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Hesperian 03:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, article fails to establish notability.  Esradekan Gibb  ^"Talk" 03:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, the volume and depth of Google Books references indicates this article can be sourced such that notability is satisfied. --Dhartung | Talk 03:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep http://books.google.com/books?q=%22Teodor+Keko&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS176US236&um=1&sa=N&tab=wp, and http://news.google.com/archivesearch?sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS176US236&um=1&tab=pn&q=%22Teodor+Keko seem to indicate notability. Hobit (talk) 04:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, plenty of sources available, as outlined above. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 05:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]
• speedy keep as obviously notable. "may be deleted' means may be deleted if other people are convinced that no sources can be found, not, must be deleted if it is presently unsourced. The article could probably have been sourced just as easily as taken here. Deletion is the last resort, and Afd should not be used to improve articles. Sourcing should be used to improve articles. Obviously its the primary obligation of the person writing the article, but then of everyone who can help. DGG (talk) 06:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Well known journalist, poet, parlimentarian, former Minister of Culture in his country. Ample written sources to create a good article on this encyclopedic subject - Peripitus (Talk) 13:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't noticed that he was a MP, by longstanding practice here all members of national parliaments are accepted as notable. DGG (talk) 14:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for being the legislator: notability of national legislators isn't just convention; it's written into WP:BIO. Nyttend (talk) 03:06, 1 April 2008 (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.