Talk:Hugo Byttebier

Merger proposal
The result of the discussion was Merge 'Eichmann' content into David Irving, with minimal biog material. Non-admin close. Pincrete (talk) 15:39, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I propose that Hugo Byttebier be merged into David Irving. I think that the content in the Byttebier article can easily be integrated into the Irving article. As the article quite rightly says he was a footnote. As such he fails WP:ANYBIO and meets WP:BIO1E. There are no other sources. Domdeparis (talk) 16:40, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support -- with redirect. No justification for separate article. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:13, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Ditto This footnote warrants a footnote in the target article. Kleuske (talk) 22:16, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Byttebier; I don't even see why a redirect is needed for such a minor nothingness. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 02:08, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support. The only claim to notability hinges on his relation to Irving; thus, his surrender of the Eichmann documents should be merged and the rest should be just removed.  City O f  Silver  22:04, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support redirecting to a footnote. I would have said "Delete" per jpgordon, but the page has several incoming links which would be disrupted if we simply delete. Xyl 54 (talk) 23:23, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * PS: Is this enough for a Snow closure? Xyl 54 (talk) 23:24, 28 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Minimal marge and redirect - The guy's only notability is in regards to giving Irving the Eichmann manuscript, and he certainly doesn't need an article for that -- even a stub -- so he can be incorporated as a mention in the Irving article (if he's not there already), with a minimal footnote about his background if necessary. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)