Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burlakov case

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. There is minimal input, but what there is suggests that the problems with the article can be fixed without requiring deletion or any other administrator activity. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:17, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Burlakov case

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Unmotivated fork from main article Oleg Burlakov, most of the article duplicates the main one, and the rest does not meet the criteria WP:BLP. Details can be seen in particular here.

It combine in an original way a set of criminal and civil cases related to the personality of Oleg Burlakov, which were conducted in different years between him and third parties, as well as between third parties without his participation.

The article does not cite and there are no reliable sources at all that would define the totality of these cases as the “Burlakov Case”. Acting in the same logic, all cases connected with the personality of any John Doe for the entire period of his life and proceedings after his death should be defined as the "John Doe Case", which is absurd. I suggest deleting the article

By the link, there is mostly a discussion of the main article Oleg Burlakov, but this one is also mentioned. At the same time, its author refuses any discussion of the content he contributes, instead swearing at me. The history of this article is as follows. In the Russian Wikipedia, I removed fragments from the article by Oleg Burlakov that violated the local analogue of WP:BLP. The user ssr silently created an article in Russian on the Burlakov case and translated it into English as well. In the Russian section, the administrators, after discussion, removed this article as violating the rules about forks and original research. After that, the user ssr translated it into Spanish and French, and in these language sections the main article by Oleg Burlakov is simply missing. In the English section, he refuses to discuss the relevance of finding the information he brings in, even my request for the source of the name Burlakovo Case (absent in authoritative sources) was deleted by him with swearing. The content of the article Oleg Burlakov can be improved. But there is no expediency for Burlakov case to be on Wikipedia, since its only purpose is stalking and it radically violates the rule WP:BLP. For the entire existence of the article, the author has not cited a single authoritative source in which the circumstances set forth in the article would be combined into some kind of "Burlakov case". Джонни Уокер (talk) 13:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Law, Cyprus, Latvia, Montenegro, Russia, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Panama, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:10, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, "farmed sockpuppet"-nominated article. "Farmed sockpuppets" are strictly prohibited from editing Wikipedia in any language. The article validity was proven by new page patrollers and other watchers (thanks to them), then deletion attempts got no support at Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard/Archive_49#Burlakov_case and after that at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive352#Oleg_Burlakov. The freshly-registered "empty" nominator's account is used for the only purpose of attacking this particular article. Which clearly indicates WP:NOTHERE — "Clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia". So that, such nominations and techniques contradict with everything Wikipedia is about. This should be not allowed per WP:NOTHERE. --ssr (talk) 08:59, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- My account is really not that active here and I mostly write to the Russian Wikipedia. But this does not affect the fact that you, firstly, violate the rules of Wikipedia, in particular WP:BLP, and secondly, you refusing to discuss these violations meaningfully. You never cited an authoritative source in which the term "Burlakov case" would be used in the same sense that you used to create the article. Since you cannot silently rollback my question here, I still ask you to answer it for everyone - where does the term come from? Who uses it besides you? Джонни Уокер (talk) 16:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  Attention Wikipedia administrators! The account "Джонни Уокер" is a "farmed sockpuppet" account. Please do what is needed in such case. -- ssr (talk) 09:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:40, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, this is in the wrong place. The BLP debate, now archived, ended with (1) a suggestion that this article could be moved to a more general title, to deal with the problem that there is no "Burlakov case" as such, just a series of legal things going on connected with him, and (2) a reply saying that wouldn't solve the BLP violations. There are two things going on here: allegations of editors pushing a point of view, showing ownership, and creating unsourced biographical information. These are serious behavioural allegations that should be handled at ANI. The other half is a content dispute, which could better be dealt with by a third opinion or dispute resolution case. AfD is probably going to make a mess of this, because neither keep nor merge addresses which bits of content are wrong, while delete could easily just refocus the content dispute on the Oleg Burlakov article. I note that neither this article nor the main article has much going on on the associated talk pages. Elemimele (talk) 12:17, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is no "problem that there is no "Burlakov case" as such", there is a reliable source for it. And more are appearing. --ssr (talk) 08:14, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:43, 7 September 2023 (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.