Deletion of Ivan Balaz Kral

Comment: A student with interests, who writes a blog. No assertion of notability and, per nom's thorough ghiting, no evidence of it either. It's all |unverified |original research too
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:OR)

Comment: Fails , and even if claims of article were verified, nothing in the article shows substantive claim of encyclopedic notability - would fail /. I'm sympathetic to , but there needs to be at least a solid claim of encyclopedic notability (not just this is "a contemporary author/poet/academic who wrote some books/poems/research
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:PROF||WP:BIO||WP:BIAS)

Comment: There is indeed massive systemic bias in Wikipedia, but giving authors the benefit of the doubt is hardly the right way to deal with it. By analogy, scientific papers don't get accepted for publication just because the journal's editor cannot find a referee with the relevant competencies. This nomination however pinpoints quite an important issue for Wikipedia, particularly for its English instance, which has an obvious transcultural dimension. An appropriate specific guideline may be useful. To me  suggests deletion in this case, but Feureau and The Way's arguments are not without merit
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)