Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/An Eye for an Eye: The Untold Story of Jewish Revenge Against Germans in 1945


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was Nomination withdrawn. The nominator withdrew their nomination, and no !votes to delete were posted (other than the nomination). (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000(talk) 15:12, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

An Eye for an Eye: The Untold Story of Jewish Revenge Against Germans in 1945

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

The article is based on a personal website and has not demonstrated any notabilty. ' Ankh '. Morpork  12:02, 7 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. This is a famous book by a famous journalist.  I would have thought the proposer was obliged to actually check notability before listing the book here.  Examples of articles in academic journals that cite the book:  (1) Bernard Linek, Recent Debates on the Fate of the German Population in Upper Silesia 1945-1950, Gernian History Vol 22 No. 3, 372–405; (2) Michael Parrish (1997): The last relic: Army general I. E. Serov, 1905–90, The Journal of Slavic Military Studies, 10:3, 109-129; (3) Alfred de Zayas, The Right to One's Homeland, Ethnic Cleansing, and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Criminal Law Forum, Vol. 6 No. 2 (1995), 257–314; (4) Lang, Berel, Holocaust Memory and Revenge: The Presence of the Past, Jewish Social Studies, n.s.:2:2 (1996:Winter) 1–20; (5) Atina Grossmann, Victims, Villains, and Survivors: Gendered Perceptions and Self-Perceptions of Jewish Displaced Persons in Occupied Postwar Germany, Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 11, Nos. 1/2, January/April 2002, 291–318; (6) Jörn Rüsen (2008): Humanism in response to the Holocaust—destruction or innovation?, Postcolonial Studies, 11:2, 191-200.  (Not that it is relevant to notability, but most of these references are positive.)   Quite a few books, some of high quality:  .  Several PhD theses, even one with a whole chapter on this book: .  Apparently 22 press/magazine articles found by Highbeam, and 34 (slightly overlapping Highbeam) by Factiva.  More in Google News. Besides that, I think the author's website can be used as a source of the author's opinion.  Mind you, a vigorous cleanup is required as the article is in a poor state at the moment. Zerotalk 13:26, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Mere citation is insufficient to meet WP:NBOOK. The relevant requirement is that "the book has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself." (My emphasis) I have found only one work to date that is on the subject of this book (a review article listed in The American Bibliography of Slavic and East European Studies for 1994). HrafnTalkStalk(P) 13:38, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The majority of the newspaper articles are either reviews of the book or articles about the controversy surrounding the book. So that criterion is met. Zerotalk 13:53, 7 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep: This nomination is baloney.  The book is clearly notable and generated significant controversy.  The nominator should withdraw the nomination or no longer edit wikipedia if they cannot conduct basic searches to determine if a subject is notable.--Milowent • hasspoken  14:01, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've done a quick bore reworking of the article.--Milowent • hasspoken 14:24, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * How do I withdraw the nomination?' Ankh '. Morpork  14:26, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * If you simply say you are willing to withdraw it, that is sufficient. Since no one else has advocated for deletion, I can close it out if you withdraw.  thanks.--Milowent • hasspoken  14:38, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I confirm my withdrawal.' Ankh '. Morpork  14:54, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.