Wacław Chamrat: Sources found mention the author in connection with the Chronicle, but do not have WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth .  There is no article for Chronicle of Biała to merge or redirect to.  // Timothy :: talk 06:14, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , History , Law ,  and Poland .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 08:01, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per nom.  No sources found on Google Books or Scholar and possibly JSTOR; GB only showed a book mentioning the subject.  Toad ette ( Merry Christmas, and a happy new year ) 13:53, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong keep Chamrat is an author of the Kronika miasta Białej (Chronicle of Biała), which is considered as a priceless source for the history of Biała in the 18th Century.  There are two sources, both written by scholars.  And you could find mentions about Chamrat even on Google Books.  [30] Herzog von Teschen ( talk ) 16:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 06:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into History of Bielsko-Biała as that article is seemingly one of the only few pages on the internet that mentions him.  Flounder fillet ( talk ) 00:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify or merge fper Ff above.  I am not seeing anything about this person outside a mention in passing in my BEFORE.  It is possible that his work ( Kronika miasta Białej / Kronika Chamrata ) would pass WP:GNG , and the author may want to write an article about it, but per WP:NINHERIT , it does not mean we need an article about his creator, about whom next to nothing is known (but if the article about his work is notable, a short bio section there would be fine).  That said, I am concerned that the two sources listed are not linked and seem very hard to verify, the presumed academic article (" Kronika miasta Białej z lat 1732–1768 zwana Kroniką Chamrata") does not return any google (gscolar/gbook) hits outside Wikipedia and its mirrors.  Due to verification trouble, I lean draftify as first choice, merge as second.  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 03:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist so we can get a consensus on whether to Keep, Delete, Draftify or Merge. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L iz Read! Talk! 05:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Fence leaning keep. On the one hand, arguments put forward by User:Herzog von Teschen point towards a keep, but on the other hand the Kronika is not accessible online (and what mentions and paraphrases from it are known are but minute) and, as User:Prokonsul Piotrus points out, next to nothing is known about the actual author. The insidious sign pointing towards a delete is that the author does not have an article on the Polish Wikipedia. I'm an inclusionist, tho, especially of topics of history, therefore I lean keep . -- Ouro ( blah blah ) 09:13, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I've created an article on the Polish Wikipedia.  Herzog von Teschen ( talk ) 16:58, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] OT: It would now need to be populated with more information on Chamrat.  -- Ouro ( blah blah ) 17:00, 17 January 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.

Discussion outcome: no consensus