This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
What are the ground for deletion?Teishin (talk) 21:05, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Carchasm proposed its deletion with the oxymoronic (and also incorrect) rationale "Lack of significant coverage in Secondary sources, only mentioned by name in the Suda." —David Eppstein (talk) 21:49, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@David Eppstein: - I'm not sure that it's incorrect rationale, but I certainly will accept your assessment now that such a deletion would be non-controversial. I would need to do more investigation of the cited sources to determine how significant the coverage actually is - it looks like the cited source may indicate that there is a different Proclus that those other contributions correspond to. If there's a prior consensus that all articles in the suda should have their own articles, can you link me to it? I looked, and couldn't find anything.
However, I also understood your rationale for de-prodding, so I'm not sure why @Teishin: started this discussion here. - car chasm (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know specifically about the Suda. But I have certainly seen prior sentiment in multiple AfDs that inclusion in a major encyclopedia should be enough by itself for notability here; the Suda would seem to qualify as one such. WP:NOTTEMPORARY is also relevant: if a topic was notable at the time the Suda was compiled, that notability is not temporary. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:39, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
