Quantum redactiones paginae "Disputatio:Mahometus Muradus Ildan" differant

:::Would someone "in the know" offer an explanation of the politics driving these deletions? Vicipaedia's text appears to be factual, and that's a prime consideration, non? Vicipaedia's text does not seem to contain aggressive self-promotion. If any links do, they can easily be cut. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] 20:44, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
::Orland, I understand your and your friend's reasons, but I do not vehemently support them. Relevance does not have the highest priority for me, see [[Vicipaedia:Gravitas]]. Accuracy and traceability have a high priority for me. So I deposed my doubts more than 2 months ago (see above) and - frankly speaking - I am not yet satisfied. We are not undemanding here, but we might have a slightly different value system. --[[Usor:Rolandus|Rolandus]] 21:19, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
::::I've looked around a bit more now. Yes, it was self-promotion. I think I should take Ildan's correspondence course. [[:no:Bruker:Orland|no:Orland]] was surely right to urge the speedy deletion of the English Wikipedia articles about all Ildan's individual books. However, I feel differently about the brief bio articles on all those language Wikipedias (incidentally, it's not true that they are "now deleted from almost every wikipedia" -- though deletion has been proposed on most of them). Ildan is a published and versatile writer with numerous books in Turkish to his credit. The way to balance the coverage of Turkish literature on this and other Wikipedias is to add articles about others, not to delete him. <font face="Gill Sans">[[Usor:Andrew Dalby|A]]<font color="green">[[:en:User:Andrew Dalby|nd]]</font>'''[[:en:User Talk:Andrew Dalby|rew D]]'''<font color="green">[[:en:User:Andrew Dalby/Bibliography|alby]]</font></font> 21:24, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)