Talk:Nenad Mišović

This page was proposed for deletion by Jasynnash2 (talk · contribs) on 6 October 2008 with the comment:
Wikipedia is not a news source or place to reproduce news stories
It was contested by QuiteUnusual (talk · contribs) on 2008-10-11 with the comment:
prod removed. While I agree with the prod the comments on the discussion page IMO count as disputing the prod from the original creator

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Crime and Criminal Biography: Organized crime Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Organized crime task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Serbia Low‑importance

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Yap, one minute after I published article, hidden spying-cop jump on my back (on my work) and want to delete article. Very good impression for new users/editors of Wikipedia. And the most comic, reason for deletion: article is NEWS and Wiki is not place for news. So, if someone don't like some topic, he can coldly make proposal for deletion under some excuse. So, if I don't like new model of Dell XPS laptop I can say: it is news, so it should be deleted. Of course, every new thing produced, IS NEWS, in any way you write about it: it will be news. It is the same when someone is judged to life sentence and then I write about it in category for it, anyone can try to delete article under excuse that it is news. So, when I wrote here about man sentenced to life in prison of course I will explain why it is happened. Instead to write several words I tried to make longer article in order that readers understand what is in question. Then deleter saw that I put external links for newspaper and he remembered that article can be deleted because "it is news".

Beside it, I want to mention that some people are beaurocratic or they get professional deformation when they do long time the same job, so I would like to ask is it possible to see somewhere how many pages this member proposed for deletion? Some people forget that someone spend time to create article and it should be supported by community but new people can just see how someone already after one minute controlled what I wrote and proposed for deletion. aleluja. Fidel Castro don't control so fast and so much. But he also misuse anything to move something what HE (oh his majesty) don't like. So, when deletion is in question, I am strongly against one word explanation why article should be deleted. That's beaurocratic behaviour and it hit people. I didn't create here million articles and of course I am angry when someone jump on my work and do something against it. So, let new people to adapt themselves, don't jump on their back so fast and with short explanation.

As I said, many articles can be seen as news, new products, new judge punishments, etc. But I saw category for such articles, so I thought I can write more articles about people from my country who finished in prison. Then move category and all such articles if you have moral problems with such topics. In this way I spent my time for nothing. Better to write in some other Pedia where exist less beaurocracy and more freedom.

And one more thing, I thought that people should contribute and fill up article with more information, but I see here only deletion or editor must alone fill up article. So if someone think that article is bad, he should change it, but I see ijn rules that editor alone should improve it. How can I improve something what is fiction in head of man who proposed article for deletion? I said that many things are news, if someone want to see it like news and to make proposal for deletion. --Predic (talk) 15:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copy edit

I saw this on the WP:GOCE list and have given it a thorough rewrite for what it's worth, but still think it fails WP:NOT. Gonzonoir (talk) 10:47, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I now found several more refs which I believe demonstrate notability; everything's now cited so I believe it satisifes WP:BLP requirements. I am watchlisting. Gonzonoir (talk) 12:28, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]