Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hungary

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Hungary. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Hungary|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Hungary. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Europe.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch
Scan for Hungary related AfDs

Scan for Hungary related Prods
Scan for Hungary related TfDs


Hungary

edit
Flóra Borsi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability not established through reliable, independent sources. Two sources are from a camera company's website; one is an interview with her; one is her own website; one is her biography for a gallery opening. No true claim to notability expressed - the "Heroine" award is not the "first" winner - she's one of 8 or so to win it in the 3rd year the award was given by the camera company. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:42, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, I apologize for any issues caused and sincerely hope to have the support and guidance of other editors as I continue on this path. 1374maafba (talk) 20:28, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment another WP:WALLOFTEXT explaining abusing WP policies by newbie status. Canvassing is not permitted. LLMs are not permitted. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:37, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The BBC and CBSNews sources that 1374maafba added to the article yesterday suffice to establish notability. As for the likely LLM generated walls of text in the AFD discussion, that's not great, but not a reason for deletion of the article. 13 is a new user, they'll get there eventually. We were all new users once. I personally didn't have LLMs available to me when I was a new user, but, you know, there but for the grace of God.... --GRuban (talk) 15:43, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it unfair to ask fellow editors to AGF of a SPA machine that has gamed the system, and published two non-notable articles on their 20th and 21st edits. We have enough volunteer work to do. This is not a net gain to the project.--WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 18:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    13: advice, listing 28 sources in the AFD is better than nothing, but actually using the best ones from there in the article is better. Ideally the way you'd have written that article was by starting from that list of sources, not by waiting for the AFD. The best ones means respected news sources, that go in depth, and not written by the article subject. Similarly, improving the article is better than writing a lot in the AFD. For the AFD, short is good. Actually for the article short and simple would be good too, phrases like "exploring themes of identity and the complexities of the human experience" and "utilizing metaphor and visual storytelling to convey deep emotional narrative" don't really mean very much. --GRuban (talk) GRuban (talk) 15:53, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your guidance. I'm a new editor and still gaining experience, so I really appreciate your help as I learn. 1374maafba (talk) 20:39, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The WP:THREE sources provided above demonstrate her notability. I'd like to remind everyone to assume good faith. Kovcszaln6 (talk) 08:10, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This discussion has been tainted by widespread canvassing, attempts to remove other people's comments here, and a smear campaign against the nom. I find it necessary to relist this for a clearer consensus. @1374maafba: you are very close to losing your editing privileges.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 18:20, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

edit

Categories

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Templates

See also