Misplaced Pages

He was the only politician to have served 2 consecutive and successful terms as the vice mayor since Democracy dawned upon Romania.The romanian press has been good sometimes, lukewarm, and mostly bad to him - it is quite obvious as he is from a Hungarian minority. His popularity should not be guaged by the anti-hungarian romanian news media but the Hungarian media. He has not just 12 media mentions as claimed.To understand his popularity and the coverage he got, we should look at the popular hungarian press, Innumerable mentions in "Szabadság", More numerous mention in another Hungarian daily "Krónika", Even more in "umsz" and "Hungarian Human Rights Foundation" citing the effort Janos BOROS has made towards upliftment of the Hungarian community in Romania, are but a few. These prove that while it is true that Janos BOROS was held in high esteem by the Hungarians and the Hungarian media in Romania as their representative in politics(and hence passes the WP:POLITICIAN muster) and was given significant exposure, the Romanian media ignored and concentrated more on the Romanian politicians. Janos BOROS is a noted figure among Hungarians and definitely deserves mention. Thus the attempt to delete his page holds no logic.(Hangakiran) 04:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

• 1. The only two-term Vice Mayor of Cluj, or in all of Romania? And in any case, is there a source indicating that might be notable? (Also, Romania was a democracy prior to 1938...)
• 2. Do you have anything to support your claim that the Romanian media is anti-Hungarian? After all, if we search Romanian newspapers for other ethnic Hungarian politicians, for László Tőkés we get 542 hits in Jurnalul Naţional, 306 hits in Adevărul, 1910 hits in Ziua, and so on. Béla Markó gets 210 in Jurnalul Naţional, 1740 in Adevărul and 6240 in Ziua. Even more obscure politicians like Jenő Szász get 67 mentions in Jurnalul Naţional, 116 in Adevărul and 98 in Ziua. So it's absurd to say that just because a politician is a Magyar, the Romanian press chooses not to cover him. Other Hungarian politicians get ample coverage.
• 3. Of course, mere mention in a paper is not enough to show notability - coverage must, per WP:GNG, "address the subject directly in detail". If you can actually translate and adapt that coverage into a legitimate article, great.
• 4. I'm not claiming Boros is irrelevant, but Tőkés, Markó and Szász (and Borbély, and Zsolt Nagy, and Winkler, and Asztalos) are far more the "representative in politics" of Hungarians in Romania than Boros is. Let's not inflate his importance beyond Cluj. Naturally, the Romanian media focused more on Romanians, who are 90% of the population as opposed to 6%. Again, it may be that notability is to be found in Szabadság, Krónika and so on, but the burden of proof is on you to do that, and so far, if we are to judge simply on the article as it stands and what political offices he has held, notability is not yet demonstrated. - Biruitorul 01:39, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Does Janos BOROS satisfy WP:GNG:

• 1. Significant coverage has been indicated in the Hungarian and Romanian media sources above. As a noted politicians, the coverage is in terms of direct relevance to Janos BOROS in his interviews, his point of view and activities noted and published by the press. This is as directly relevant as it can get. WP:GNG also staes: Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive. Janos Boros as the vice mayor was bound to be mentioned in most of the news alongside other political entities, as administration and politics is not a one person game. So he got coverage which was definitely more than trivial and sometimes less than exclusive". If you read the the coverage links in the Hungarian media above and even many of the Romanian media given below of Janos BOROS, you would see this to be true. Hence WP:GNG is perfectly satisfied.
• 2. Then the WP:GNG continues to mention, notability in Misplaced Pages indicates verifiability and Substantial coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject constitutes verifiable evidence of notability. The Hungarian media coverage is both independent and verifable and hence their reporting on Janos BOROS makes him notable.
• 3. Whether the Romanian media is anti-Hungarian or not is a matter of perspective and not the point in question here. The actual question is whether Janos BOROS got "Significant Coverage" as per the WP:GNG which he did through the Hungarian media, which is independent and verifiable.
• 4. WP:GNG also staes: Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive. Janos Boros as the vice mayor was bound to be mentioned in most of the news alongside other political entities, as administration and politics is not a one person game. So he got coverage which was definitely more than trivial and sometimes less than exclusive". If you read the the coverage links in the Hungarian media above and even many of the Romanian media given below of Janos BOROS, you would see this to be true. Hence WP:GNG is perfectly satisfied.
• 5. Whether Janos BOROS is more relevant or not than another politician is also not the question here. "Significant coverage" and "Notability" which are proven beyond doubt determine acceptance. As to the aspect of finding mention in Romanian media, 61 mentions in Evenimentul Zilei, 37 mentions in Adevărul, 41 mentions in Ziua, 200 mentions in Clujeanul - a newspaper from his own city, 128 mentions in hotnews.ro are significant.
• 6. So, last but not the least, Romanian media being unfavourable to Janos BOROS is only in comparison to the Hungarian Media. If you look at the Romanian media coverage he has got, that by itself would be enough to satisfy the norms of the WP:GNG. But if you factor in the coverage in the independent Hungarian press as well, it becomes not just significant but conclusive.

This IS "Significant" and "Notable" enough to put this debate to rest. (Hangakiran) 06:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Biographical)
• AfD debates