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.
I'm none the wiser from having read the Russian Wikipedia's article; but so many potted biographies of Гринер, Вера Александровна turn up in a quick Google Books search that I suspect that a proper biographical article is supportable from Russian language sources. Uncle G (talk) 08:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable individual, not sure what their career was to be honest. Name is too common to find anything about this individual. Delete for lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 15:40, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Surprising that a thorough WP:BEFORE didn't manage to work out her field: it doesn't seem possible to say someone isn't notable without understanding the article well enough to know what she did. (OK, my school-days study of Russian still allows me to transliterate, even if I've forgotten most of the rest, so when I looked at her ru.wiki article I spotted a link to Ритмическая гимнастика - "Ritmicheskaya gimnastica", approx - and its equivalent in en.wiki was Dalcroze eurhythmics.) PamD20:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest I suspected "rhythmitician" had something to do with dance (although I had never heard of Dalcroze eurhythmics) but I was surprised whomever created the article would use such an arcane term in the subject description hatnote so I figured I'd mention it at the outset. Article is still a copypaste hagiography that fails GNG and SIGCOV. Nirva20 (talk) 22:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nirva20That's why it was subtly indented only to the same level as yours, ie to show it was replying to the same point as you were. @Uncle G It was a long time ago - Russian O Level was the only way to drop Latin while doing science subjects, and fascinating at the time but not used since except on one holiday in 1974. And Google Books won't show me those pages, sadly. PamD15:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as pointed out by UncleG above, she is included in many book sources in Russian, and is clearly a notable figure in the field of dance / movement / eurythmics. Her Russian Wikipedia article has existed since 2008, edited by multiple editors. This, shown as an External Link and dated 2020, seems to be a close paraphrase of the ru.wiki article, but with an added photo, and was thought worth publishing by a theatrical institute (Teatralnie Institut im B. Shchukina. Uchebnie Teatr) .... ahah: Boris Shchukin Theatre Institute, where, I've just noticed, she taught. Note that the creating editor of the en.wiki article appears to be the creator of the ru.wiki article, and appears to be a Russian-speaker rather than English-speaker, which accounts for some of the clunkiness of this article. It needs improvement, not deletion. PamD16:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's in addition to the two aforementioned apparently an entry in ISBN9785852700995, whose title Русский балет: энциклопедия indicates that it's an encyclopaedia of Russian ballet. There's an entry in an index of Russian and Soviet biography, although I have not found what the index, a separate book, is indexing, and what is on pages 429–430 of it. ISBN9785898840259 page 476 has a 1-paragraph biography saying Ученица Далькроза which PamD will have to translate for us. Uncle G (talk) 07:05, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep on the merits of the person, and a sort of procedural keep anyway -- a nomination that begins with a denegration of an entire field with research journals and professors, and comments that connect Dalcroze eurhythmics with hip-hop aren't a great way to establish understanding of the norms of a field. (I'm a music prof. with not much enthusiasm for eurhythmics, but I do know that it's a well established field of studies). I'm tempted to go with weak keep because the article is a mess, but, as I've been argued against on supporting for amazing "too-soon" articles, the state of the article not part of the notability criteria. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert(talk)09:57, 11 March 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.
