Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legitimacy of Volodymyr Zelenskyy

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legitimacy of Volodymyr Zelenskyy

[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)

Wikipedia is absolutely not for challenging the "legitimacy" of politicians and their rule. See WP:SOAP.Ratnahastin (talk) 02:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Politics, and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! WP:SOAP has five different subcategories. Could you be more specific, please? The article is not about challenging anything, it covers the debate, cites legislative acts. I'd be glad to hear your concerns to make the article better. Steffuld (talk) 08:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Right from the start, the article relies on a bunch of op-eds, which are insufficient establish notability. The legal section is just inserted without context. The "private observers" bit is one article weasel-worded into a larger issue. At most, this could be merged into the Zelenskyy article. Cortador (talk) 16:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Thank you for pointing out questionable sources. I've added the Background section to provide the context and rewrote the Other concerns section to cover more sources. Steffuld (talk) 19:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inserting a legal section without context is a WP:SYNTH feature. JFHJr (㊟) 02:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I could close this as a Soft Deletion but I think this discussion warrants more time and participation for other editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/Delete, fail to see why this merits it's own article instead of being brought up in relevant articles. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the reliable sources cited in the article describe this subject as "a Russian propaganda claim".[1] Much of the body text cites primary source documents. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and per Rjjiii. JFHJr (㊟) 05:23, 2 June 2024 (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.