Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruben Katsobashvili

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. No valid deletion rationale presented. If the veracity of the content of the page is disputed, that is an editorial issue, as long as that content is verifiable by reliable sources. Since the notability of the subject was never questioned here, and no BLP violations were claimed, there is no reason to delete the page. Owen× 12:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ruben Katsobashvili (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)

According to the recently published book Terrible Humans by Patrick Alley, a co-founder of the anti-corruption NGO Global Witness, this page is a wholly false biography. The book, in the chapter 'The Gatekeeper', states that it was created as part of a scheme establishing a network of false, or shell, companies designed to enable Dan Gertler and others to evade sanctions imposed by the United States Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control in December 2017 for their role in 'opaque and corrupt mining and oil deals in the Democratic Republic of the Congo'. Katsobashvili is also mentioned on the EN:WP page for Interactive Energy, another Gertler-related company involved in the scheme. Further details available if required.14GTR (talk) 04:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep for failing to assert a valid deletion rationale.
Clearly Global Witness has decided to make an issue of the truth of his biography, and their claims have been reported by others. And no doubt you find their claims and that of their founder credible. But an NGO being unhappy with a Wikipedia article doesn't constitute a deletion rationale.
He does get press coverage (some of which includes the allegations by Global Witness) like [1], [2], [3]. So it seems likely that the article passes WP:GNG (and you certainly haven't made the argument it doesn't).
I'm not trying to defend this guy, or advocating for keeping an article if it's just a bunch of lies. But if you have reliable sources demonstrating that parts of the article are untrue, wouldn't the appropriate thing to be to add those claims to the article? Then we get a full picture rather than just taking an approach that results in Wikipedia containing no information about this person. Oblivy (talk) 05:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I could accept the arguement that Katobashvili warrents a mention in the article on Gertler, in the context of Gertler's response to the US sanctions but beyond that all we have is an individual who, seemingly, agreed for his name and photo to be used by others to avoid those sanctions. According to Terrible Humans he is not a career oil and mining magnate and Global Witness could find no trace of the companies listed on the WP page as having being created by him in the various corporate records they checked. Apologies for the delay in responding.14GTR (talk) 06:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your point but I think I've already addressed it. You have an NGO that is rubbishing Wikipedia's article, and nothing else. I not only don't see that's a valid deletion rationale but also think it would set a bad precedent to delete an article just based on someone off-wiki saying it's inaccurate. Oblivy (talk) 10:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that Global Witness are stating that the article, and the false story it relates were created as part of the scheme to avoid sanctions. By portraying Katobashvili as an career oil and mining magnate funding Interactive Energy, it attempts to give credence to that company which was a key part of the sanctions work-around. The three sources you found also, by my reading, make this point.14GTR (talk) 11:55, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And to the extent they do, they cite Global Witness. Oblivy (talk) 12:11, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have added a section to the article describing the allegations at the heart of ths AfD. In my opinion this should have been the first thing done with this claim, although there may be more granular WP:BALANCE reporting on GW's research about some of the claims within the other article sections. I remain firmly of the view that we should resist any efforts by outsiders to censor Wikipedia through off-wiki allegations, even if it's done for noble reasons.
Note that I was a bit hesitant about including the embedded WP:ASPERSION about the page creator being an employee. It's one of the bases for the GW allegations, so I've described their allegation at arms-length without adopting it myself. If anyone has concerns I think the words about being created by an employee could be removed. Oblivy (talk) 02:52, 16 September 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.