Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Macedonian studies (2nd nomination)

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. It looks like the article has been vastly improved through editors (many thanks) and there is a consensus to Keep it. Thanks to User:Wcquidditch for assisting an editor with the AFD process. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonian studies

Macedonian studies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Science, and North Macedonia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:35, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing this. Ballantyne82 (talk) 04:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There's no reason to have this article, as it's just a brief definition of the term "Macedonian studies" and hasn't been expanded beyond that since its creation in 2010. That information could be, at most, rolled into the article on the Macedonian language. There's a list of Macedonian linguists, but if there's enough of those, it's better to list them in an article called List of Macedonian linguists, or create a category for that. Cortador (talk) 11:59, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I was planning on nominating it for AfD too. In the absence of reliable sources which discuss the subject matter, this is the best course of action. StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Changing my vote to keep, due to the addition of new sources. The lack of in-depth coverage about the subject in English-language sources is to be noted though, which is what influenced my precious vote. Despite this, I think that the article can be still improved. StephenMacky1 (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The article most certainly requires (and deserve) additional work, yet the topic itself seems almost obviously notable to me. I believe we should be able to identify further reliable and relevant online and print sources in English, Macedonian, Serbo-Croatian, German and other languages.--MirkoS18 (talk) 07:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. There needs to be some kind of disambiguation between 'Ancient Macedonian studies' and Macedonian studies as a subfield of Slavic studies. A bibliography for the former can be found at https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780195389661-0140 and can be accessed via the Wikipedia library here. Some more discussion can be found at https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004209237_003 (link for access via WP library). Jähmefyysikko (talk) 09:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There also needs to be disambiguation of Macedonian studies of other peoples of Macedonia generally, if you are only focussed on Slavic studies in this article. Ballantyne82 (talk) 11:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Since I am involved quite a lot into ethnic minorities topic I would say most certainly and in principle yes, however, in practice we can legitimately request it if we expect the same in case of Croatian, contemporary Greek, German, Turkish or any other area study.--MirkoS18 (talk) 15:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Follow-up Comment after Keep vote. In an effort to propose
  WP:HEY I introduced a couple of references and some additional content about the discipline. I don't know too much about the topic, but I hope my contribution will help in preservation of the article.--MirkoS18 (talk) 20:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Hi. Thanks for your contributions. I do still have some concerns:

  - Where's the source that the field covers literature, history, and culture too? I think "comprehensive" might be redundant.

  - Which other post-Yugoslav country is it taught in apart from Croatia?

  - The term "Macedonian specialist" is not found in English-language sources. The term "Macedonist" appears to be more commonly used in a nationalist context, at least in English-language sources. Although, the source Lexicon Grammaticorum: A Bio-Bibliographical Companion to the History of Linguistics does explicitly mention Božidar Vidoeski and Blaže Koneski as "Macedonists" and uses it in a linguistic context.

  It'd be also great if you could provide some quotes here in English so that other editors who aren't knowledgeable with those languages can verify the statements. StephenMacky1 (talk) 21:21, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  All of those are perfectly legitimate questions and if any statement may be controversial for some reason we should look for further references. As for your initial comment, it seems like quite banal and unexceptional statement to me, but if for any reason it is still questioned, we may look further. As for the other post-Yugoslav states, they most certainly include at least Serbia and Slovenia (easily referenced). The last one, I have no idea about this term, it can be removed if you feel the need to do it. Importantly, all of this is about the quality of the article if I am right? This can be addressed on the talk page with appropriate grading of the quality. The article doesn't have to be A class to be preserved. If I can help any further I will to the extent my time permits. And, just not to miss the last part, notable sources may be in any language - if there are some additional in English great, but any language will work. Greetings.--MirkoS18 (talk) 21:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I just added some citations for places where Macedonian is taught at the university level (Albania, Canada, Croatia, Poland, USA). Maybe it's just me, but this article doesn't seem to be lacking when compared to, say, Albanology or Serbian studies. I'll go with Keep here. --Local hero ^talk 16:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Jingiby (talk) 08:40, 29 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.