Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikos Stylos

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 delete. As failing WP:PROF, per Future Perfect. Shimeru (talk) 00:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nikos Stylos

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

Article is a about a minor advocacy-type personality and usual nationalist Balkan pseudo-historian that dabbles into the usual fringe theories connecting Pelasgians and Albanians. Fails WP:NOTABLE and WP:ACADEMIC on all counts. Has not received any kind of significant coverage in mainstream reliable sources, nor has his work been cited in peer-reviewed journals. The only coverage this individual has received is from other fringe nationalist historians and advocates. A debate on the article's talkpage has failed to establish notability. This individual is likely a real-world acquaintance of the article creator, who is also a Cham advocacy SPA. Athenean (talk) 20:22, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep His work has been cited by a number of historians in Albania (Prof. Dr. Beqir Meta (member of the Albanian Academy of Sciences): [1] 2.Prof. Dr. Rexhep Doçi [2] 3.Dr. Laurent Bica (lector at a university in Tirana) Bica, Laurant. "Niko Stillo: Njeriu akademi" (Niko Stillo, the Academy Man). pp. 218. Tirana, 2008.), et.al. He is well-known in Albania, and those sources shows that and finally a comment to Athenean: Your afd report seems like an WP:IDONTLIKEIT, you are not the one who would judge what`s fringe, pseud-historian, etc.,etc: the authors I sorted above are not fringe nationalist historians and advocates, but rather proffessors, all of them, and one of them is a member of the Albanian Academy of Sciences. Thanks,Balkanian`s word (talk) 20:34, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is a WP:IDONTLIKEIT AfD, mainly because the person is a Cham Albanian, a minority group of Greece. He has been interviewed by Shekulli, a newspaper widely circulated newspaper of Albania and one of the 3 largest Albanian newspapers[3]. In Albanian national television TVSH there has been a program about him [4][5][6]. Members of the Albanian Academy of Sciences have examined, peer-reviewed and written about him and his works:

Beqir Meta [7],Rexhep Doçi [8]. Also Laurant Bica, lector at the University of Tirana has written a book examining his works [9].--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 20:45, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: My, the sheer intensity of Balkanian's response is telling. In response, none of the two publications provided by Balkanian are in any way notable or reliable themselves. They are not peer-reviewed, rather, they are self-published essays, and not even in English. Who are these people, and why should they be taken seriously? I stand by comment that this man's work is nothing more than FRINGE advocacy. The two individuals cited by Balkanian above are themselves not notable. A university lecturer? Come on. What's next, his work has been cited at www.illyrians.org? Moreover, these days, anyone who tries to connect Pelasgians and Albanians has crossed into WP:FRINGE territory, as such such theories are totally rejected in scholarly sources. This would explain why this man's work has not been cited in the mainstream, peer-reviewed, scientific literature. The Albanian Academy of Sciences was until very recently advocating the "liberation" of Cameria and Illirida, and their incorporation into a "unified Albania". Hardly the most credible of institutions. Athenean (talk) 20:47, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing more than 1) a self-published essay from a website, 2) a FRINGE tract about the usual Pelasgian nonsense, 3) some more fringe nonsense from another self-published website. None of these meet "substantial coverage in mainstream reliable sources" or "significant coverage in the peer-reviewed literature". It's impossible to find a word about this guy in English or in a single serious, reliable source. Athenean (talk) 20:51, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What you see and your opinion about the Academy of Sciences of Albania is irrelevant to WP:NN, which has been verified. Original link from Shekulli: [10] --— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

delete There are not references to peer review journals and other independant and reliable sources to indicate that he is notable. He is a non-notable advocate for one side of a controversial theory, but no for a fringe theory. Prsaucer1958 (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the record Mentor Nazarko who interviewed him has cowritten with James Pettifer this book [11]. If he was that not notable he wouldn't be interviewed by Nazarko.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:19, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Being interviewed by some one notable doesn't automatically bestow notability. Prsaucer1958 (talk) 21:22, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As per talk page. Although I've asked for at least one reference the answer was that there are some videos about him in youtube. Might become some kind of tv star some time, but having an article in wikipedia is hard to reach by the moment.Alexikoua (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:32, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:32, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no sign of notability. Note that for academic (including pseudo-academic) writers, the inclusion criteria is the "professor test" (WP:PROF). Merely being mentioned/cited by other writers somewhere is far, far from enough. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no proof of any wider notability outside a fringe circle. Constantine ✍ 09:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because IMO he meets Wikipedia:AUTHOR#Creative_professionals. If Stylos is the first one to lecture on Pelasgian origin of Albanians, that doesn't mean he is in fringe territory. Galileo Galilei also was fringe theory at his time. Stylos is one of the pioneers to propose the Pelasgian origin of the Albanians, along with Dhimiter Pilika and user:Athenean may lecture at his home, not these academics. --Gollomboc (talk) 16:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment perhaps, but when he claims that Albanians were the first to domesticate the horse, that the Phaistos Disk is written in Albanian, etc (based on what I found about his views in the internet), then he is definitely very deep in fringe territory. Either way, the question is not what views he holds, but whether he is notable enough. As a historian, which is what he claims to be after all, he does not meet WP:ACADEMIC notability criteria, plain and simple. Constantine ✍ 17:15, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have not read his books. Can you please cite him about what you just said? --Gollomboc (talk) 18:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ROFL @ comparing this fellow to Galileo! Athenean (talk) 18:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He isn't the "first one to lecture on Pelasgian origin". The "Pelasgian" meme isn't new, revolutionary or even original; it's a thoroughly obsolete 19th-century idea. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable to have his own article like the references prove.--KëngaJonë 18:50, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

delete, Nothing reliable on him and nothing of note Megistias (talk) 19:20, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Pure pseudo-science POV pushing persona. He claimed he deciphered Phaistos Disk and that the text on it is written in arvanitika:[12], page 16.... The Cat and the Owl (talk) 20:21, 24 May 2010 (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.