Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yevgeni Ponasenkov

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The result was keep, withdrawn. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:43, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yevgeni Ponasenkov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV. Article that continued to be puffed/npov. Refs are a mess and the first three are interviews. scope_creep^Talk 08:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Russian wiki has enough articles. He is quite famous and very controversial figure. He is more showman than historian. Now his wiki-article is misleading and present him as an autority. -GorgonaJS (talk) 01:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Does not pass NPROF, however searching for sources in Russian (Евгений Понасенков) yields significant coverage in Russian media (and some occasional quotes in English media), such as (unsure of reliability of each one, but there are many diverse sources in the Google News results): [1][2][3][4] and a whole lot more. Appears to be notable as video blogger and commentator.--Eostrix  (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 08:23, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GorgonaJS: @Eostrix: Combined with the interviews references and a couple of others in the ref list that I discovered and look reasonably decent, is more than enough for a keep. The question remains how to describe him. In the article is describes him as a historian, journalist, theater director, television host, actor and singer, at one time before it was copyedited quite drastically. Hows would you describe him? Definently not a theater director, television host, actor and singer. I don't see any evidence for being a journalist? I don't see any evidence describing him as a historian. Publicist and commentator? scope_creep^Talk 10:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Russian wiki describes him as "publicist specializing in historical revisionism, video blogger, TV presenter and director of a number of performances. He played episodic roles in films and TV series, was an organizer of cultural events; author of publications on the history of the Napoleonic wars, which caused a negative reaction from the scientific and historical community" -GorgonaJS (talk) 10:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, British media did describe him as a "scholar" in 2019 ([5][6] in coverage on Oleg Sokolov), so I'm not sure that's entirely inaccurate though it certainly isn't his claim to notability.--Eostrix  (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 11:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Eostrix: What is his claim to notability? Would it be accurate to see he is a publicist and author specializing in historical revisionism. Are any books written, do they have any reviews? scope_creep^Talk 22:36, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding he's notable for being a publicist / media personality. His book on 1812 has a ruwiki entry - Первая научная история войны 1812 года which is not favorable (many negative reviews). The book probably passes NBOOK on enwiki should anyone want to work through the Russian. I would be careful with using the revisionist label myself, as I don't know enough here and this requires going through the Russian sources carefully.--Eostrix  (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 11:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yip. I don't have much experience with NBOOK but plan to put up a bunch of books at some point, so I guess it is a good time to start. I think publicist and media personality is better. It seems to chime with what is there. scope_creep^Talk 14:34, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Nomination Withdrawn Seems to be notable and sorted out what he is notable for. scope_creep^Talk 22:49, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]