User:Ace111

MediaWiki version 1.43.0-wmf.24 (72fea51).

Wikipedia:Babel

ru

Русский — родной язык этого участника.

en-4

This user can contribute with a near-native level of English.

de-2

Dieser Benutzer hat fortgeschrittene Deutschkenntnisse.

fr-1

Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau élémentaire de français.

Search user languages

This user is a bot owner. His bot is Acebot (talk · contribs).

This user runs a bot, Acebot (contribs). It performs tasks that are extremely tedious to do manually.

This user has created a global account. Ace111's main account is on Wikipedia (in Russian).

Википедия
Я вношу вклад в русскую Википедию.

I support the Russian-language Wikipedia with my contributions.

This user is from the planet Earth.

This user enjoys the
Picture of the Day.¤

This user contributes using Firefox.

Picture of the day

Wilson Square

Photograph credit: Emptywords

Edits Count / Contribution Tree , Plot ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Top 10 Greatest Wikipedias

English	Sinugboanon	Deutsch	Français	Svenska	Nederlands	Русский	Español	Italiano	Polski
6,888,823	6,116,915+	2,945,948+	2,638,138+	2,595,228+	2,168,309+	2,001,620+	1,981,316+	1,883,894+	1,629,645+

More than 63,727,677 articles in all Wikipedias

Slavic Wikipedias have 8,226,297 articles.

Russia

Ida Loo-Talvari

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. When I first came across this article, the only source cited was to an unreliable genealogy website. I removed that source because it isn't usable per the reliable sources noticeboard. The subject's only claim to notability in the article is who her husband and brother are. This seems to be a case of WP:NOTINHERITED. 4meter4 (talk) 23:59, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Estonia, Russia, and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Aeroflot Flight F-637

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

Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: There exists no reliable independent (significant) news coverage of the event, no secondary sources, no in-depth coverage, no (sustained) continued coverage, no demonstrated lasting effects and no long-term impacts on a significant region of the world that would make this event notable enough for a stand-alone article. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:53, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Russia. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:53, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

National liberation struggle of the Ingush people

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

This article is a POVFORK and we already have a decent article at Ingush people. There may be some elements of this article that can be merged there, but I don’t think this article as a whole should be retained. Mccapra (talk) 06:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Russia. Mccapra (talk) 06:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and History. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:42, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Aeroflot Flight 227 (1969)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT. Was not able to find any sources for the entire flight. Although it does meet WP:PLANECRASH, that isn't a formal guideline or notability policy. Sir MemeGod  12:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Russia. Sir MemeGod  12:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete – Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: There exists no reliable independent (significant) news coverage of the event, no secondary sources, no in-depth coverage, no (sustained) continued coverage, no demonstrated lasting effects and/or no long-term impact on a significant region of the world that would make this event notable enough for a stand-alone article. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Aeroflot accidents and incidents in the 1960s. Incident is sufficiently covered there. Meltdown627 (talk) 16:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

•Weak Keep per amount of fatalities, i feel better sources can be still found about this accident. I'm saddened to see so many notable Aeroflot incidents have to go, but i feel this could be saved. @Sir MemeGod Lolzer3k 17:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

While it did have fatalities, the only source we even have to back up the fatalities is an archived Russian site, which I'm not even sure is reliable. As stated, WP:PLANECRASH doesn't apply here, as it isn't a deletion policy. Sir MemeGod  17:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to the Aeroflot accidents and incidents page. This was an unattributed translation of an ruWiki article, so they don't have any additional sources. Even if this did meet the GNG (I'm assuming the sources would mostly be Russian-language 1960s era stuff), I concur with Meltdown627 that coverage is not so sufficient as to merit a standalone page. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 20:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Rostov-on-Don pre-trial detention center hostage crisis

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

Seems to fail WP:NEVENT, specifically the lasting part. I cannot find any continued coverage of this event in English, or any secondary source for that matter. It is possible some exists in Russian or under a name different to the title. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Terrorism and Russia. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep haven't done too deep of a dive (i guess more of a week keep, I'm pretty sure this is notable though) but with a quick search I found this article from only 4 days ago, reflecting on the consequences of the hostage taking. There's definitely more but this shows continued coverage and consequences for NEVENT PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:33, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Gleb Frank

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

BLP with no coverage. Reference are routine business news. Passing mentions, PR. Fails WP:SIGCOV WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 10:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Comment: I see Forbes coverage here, not sure that's enough for the article to stand. I will do further research before casting my votes.

Tesleemah (talk) 18:10, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Its a passing mention. One of the reasons I posted it. scope_creep^Talk 20:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

April 2024 Chernihiv missile strike

AfDs for this article:

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

This was up for AfD a few months ago, and since then, there have been so many other attacks like this one. I don't see notability, based on the lack of any sort of continued coverage, that would make this attack stand out from the other hundreds of such attacks at this point. NOTNEWS? Discuss below so it can be settled. Oaktree b (talk) 03:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 03:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, Military, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete one missile attack among many in this war. No ongoing notability. Mztourist (talk) 04:27, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete per nom. It's already mentioned in Chernihiv#Siege of Chernihiv. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

•Delete sadly, although tragic, its just another missile strike from the Russia-Ukraine wars spillovers and affects on civillians in russia and ukraine alike, it has no standing notabillity. @Oaktree b Lolzer3k 17:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Pan-Nakhism

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

can't find GNG, has a series of random page moves and it seems like this could be better off merged with Nakh peoples article if the obvious LLM doesn't cause an issue — Karnataka 17:40, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. — Karnataka 17:40, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

i have sources , here is it: https://snifferip.com/chechen_history.pdf

Its the «Jaimoukha amjad The chechens» Book NakhBoy (talk) 17:43, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:44, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

.рус

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

No good sources, seems to fail WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. The article literally says, twice, that there is a lack of information for use in writing about it.. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 13:35, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Russia. Shellwood (talk) 14:07, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep: Many references exist in the corresponding article in the Russian Wikipedia at https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/.%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81 or ru:.рус That article also includes a detail chronology of the top-level domain. Once the information in the Russian article is added to this one, notability should be clear. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:13, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Looking at the russian article, a large majority of the sources are from icann, which is not what I would describe as independent third-party coverage congruent with WP:GNG Sohom (talk) 16:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep: I'd say it's a plurality. There's usable sources like CNews, RIA Novotsi, and Lenta.ru. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 18:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Irina Mataeva

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

Article is written like a resume and based on sources connected to the subject. Not clear the article passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Russia. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Userfy. We need more research. Right now, the article is in pretty bad shape. However, if she does have this wide range of repertoire, and she has toured and performed in multiple cities with important companies, and she had a role of the protagonist’s love interest of Tatyana in Eugene Onegin, and we can find sources that document all of it, then she is notable per WP:MUSICBIO. That’s a lot of work. Bearian (talk) 02:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

@Bearian I would support moving it to user or draft space if someone wants to work on it and needs time to source the article. Best.4meter4 (talk) 16:02, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Not sure if I can do it, due to being busy IRL. Bearian (talk) 18:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

List of entertainment events at the Olimpiyskiy Stadium

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the Olimpiyskiy Stadium (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. No inclusion criteria, very weak referencing. mikeblas (talk) 14:43, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Russia. Shellwood (talk) 15:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Others

Draft

Shortcuts

Science

Lectka enantioselective beta-lactam synthesis

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

A couple of primary sources in the scientific literature do not show this topic meets WP:GNG, nor does it demonstrate that the topic merits a named reaction after the corresponding author. The current content is likely inaccessible to most readers. There may be some content that could be merged into β-Lactam#Synthesis. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Roberto G. Carbone

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

Article about a person that doesn't meet WP:GNG. The first source is a database result as well as unverifiable. The second sources was like that too. The third one, embt.org, is solely a tribute to another man called "Alberto", and has nothing to do with this article. Source 5 is undoubtedly unreliable, and source 6 is a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE (because it's written by him, I would call it a WP:SELFPUB. ORCID isn't needful especially when citing as a biographical information. I don't know much about it, but it does appear like a user generated site. I was thinking how we can structure a person's research as academics always write many publications. On this aspect, there are many primary sources; books written by him, and thy are from source 9 to 11. Primary sources may be useful and good, but at the same time doesn't tell us how notable was that research. WA it reviewed by critics, did it appear on TV sites, e.t.c.

The subject's co-authored work, and his first book according to the article, doesn't appear to meet WP:NBOOK. This is applicable to the third (there was no mention of the second book). A Fellow of the American College of CHEST Physicians isn't notable per WP:NACADEMIC as the membership including non elected paid position is shown here. Same as the American Heart Association. Additionally, a letter of recommendation on someone doesn't show his notable that person is, and it isn't an award per WP:ANYBIO. This was accepted via AFC by me, for the sale of this AFD. The creator is likely a COI editor who has moved this page twice, and it has been draftified twice too. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Authors, Literature, Education, Science, and Italy. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Low GS citations in a very high cited field. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:16, 27 September 2024 (UTC).

Comment ORCID's mean nothing with regards to notability. I have one, you can register for one, for free. We were encouraged at one point to register for one with our Wikipedia credentials... Not sure how useful it is, but it doesn't help notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete I tend to agree with the explanation above, doesn't seem to have gained recognition in the field yet due to the low citation index. Oaktree b (talk) 14:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Based on the changes I have reported and the previous scientific material collected, I completely disagree with your opinion that the Roberto G. Carbone page is not worthy of being published on Wikipedia English.

By reading your criticisms and opinions, you are asked to evaluate the page according to the scientific criteria already adopted with other biographical pages of more or less famous scientists that I have taken as a comparison to evaluate the validity of the page and the sources cited by me.

Please remember that there are many sources from English scientific societies that cannot be considered unreliable. I would also like to point out that many of the secondary sources cannot be cited as they do not exist on the web but only physically in paper format (for example scientific magazines, local newspapers, independent information). I therefore ask you to let me know how I can possibly insert this additional data.

It is recommended to use international scientific criteria to evaluate the quality and scientific impact of the research carried out by Dr. Roberto G. Carbone with those who have the appropriate scientific requirements.

Last revision:

The English Wikipedia version is much more accurate than the Italian one. In detail, in the introduction I have added more accurate information regarding the scientific studies and the collaboration of Roberto G. Carbone's closest colleagues.

I added in the "Research" section the close collaboration with the Nobel Prize winner Prof. Renato Dulbecco in the physiology of lung cancer.

I added a quote with the photograph of the current president of the Royal Society Medicine who recommended that I write as a courtesy that Roberto G. Carbone is honored to be a member of the Royal Society Medicine.

Finally I added the appointment of Roberto G. Carbone to the editorial board of the scientific journal The Lancet by the Editor. Rolando8891 (talk) 16:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep, per discussion above by Rolando8891. Jeffrey Beall (talk) 20:45, 28 September 2024 (UTC).

David Watson (entrepreneur)

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

No more than an advert for Ohme. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. No indication of significance. UPE. scope_creep^Talk 22:15, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Sources 2 and 3 are RS... more about the company than the person. I"m not sure the company is notable though... Oaktree b (talk) 23:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete: I was going to redirect to the company, but there isn't enough coverage about them [1] and [2] are typical. I suppose the two Irish Times articles could be used for an article about the company, but one's mostly this person talking about things with a bit on the company... We aren't debating an article on the company; delete the entrepreneur's article due to a lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 00:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Science, Environment, and Ireland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete - delete per nom, fails WP:BIO. Spleodrach (talk) 06:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

IC 167

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

Could not find any individual coverage on this object. Should redirect to List of IC objects.

Added after Praemonitus's vote: While there is coverage of the group it is a part of, I couldn't find any coverage of the object specifically. Sir MemeGod  18:54, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Astronomy. Sir MemeGod  18:54, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
It's borderline. I find brief discussions of IC 167 in a few studies, particularly of the NGC 697 group. Praemonitus (talk) 13:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 22:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

PG 1543+489

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

Quasar that fails WP:NASTRO as an object with no independent coverage discovered after 1850. Article is also impossible to read, this equation being in the first paragraph; " <Γ2-12 keV > = 1.89±0.1". These equations are all over the article. Sir MemeGod  16:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Astronomy. Sir MemeGod  16:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep: It's discussed in a number of papers, including Vignali et al (2008) and Aoki et al (2005). Praemonitus (talk) 20:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Weak Delete: I just stripped out all the text that was purely references to catalog papers, but there's still quite a lot of nonsensical text there. If you're going to advocate to keep it, please go and clean up the remaining text. - Parejkoj (talk) 17:37, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep per Praemonitus. 21 Andromedae (talk) 15:41, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:02, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Science Proposed deletions

Science Miscellany for deletion

Science Redirects for discussion

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Disambiguate

Deletion Review

This is a Wikipedia user page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ace111.