Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Freemason Exhibition


 * 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   keep. Also, I'm not aware of precedent that AFDs can be on specific revisions. causa sui (talk) 00:10, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Anti-Freemason Exhibition

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Let me state this clearly: this likely is a notable topic, and while AfD is not a cleanup, please keep on reading why we should delete this and start from clean slate. Or point me to another venue where the article problems are solvable.

This article has around been since May 2006, when it was started by User:FrontLine as normal stub. Then, in June 2006, User:Respos blatantly copied and pasted contents of this web page of the University of Minnesota.

So we had this copyvio for some 5 years, mostly unchanged, while the article was used as typical Balkanic pissing ground.

Then, in June 2011, User:Свифт "expanded" its contents (while keeping copyvio) with completely unsourced WP:COATRACK, praising Freemasons, Serbian Chetniks and their leader Draža Mihailović, which are completely unconnected with the topic.

In a nutshell, the last clean, reasonable and copyvio-free version is this stub from May 2006. Can we agree to delete all revisions up to that one? No such user (talk) 15:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 15:14, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 15:15, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment Agree that most of the article needs deleting. Also, after all of that time it has zero references. I 'spose AFD is not the correct place for this but possibly the fact that it has no indication of wp:notability after 5 years and eligible for deletion is the needed lever. North8000 (talk) 16:38, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep All that is necessary is to replace it with a translation of the German article, which at least at a superficial reading seems to have no significant problems; there are additional references in the French Wikipedia.Did anyone even look at the other articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)
 * Look, I even volunteer to moderately expand this article, to approximately reach the de:Anti-Freimaurer-Ausstellung level. But I'd really like to start from a clean slate, not with easy-to-revert crap from the history. No such user (talk) 06:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You should ask for the copyvio revisions to be deleted at WP:CP not here. FuFoFuEd (talk) 21:07, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * But from WP:CP, "The infringing text will remain in the page history for archival reasons unless the copyright holder asks the Wikimedia Foundation to remove it (unless it is tagged for copyvio-revdel.  DGG ( talk ) 00:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC)). "
 * I edited the DGG's post, because I think he erroneously substed the contents of copyvio-revdel No such user (talk) 09:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, so he should tag it with copyvio-revdel. FuFoFuEd (talk) 11:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, revert to 2006 version, and build from there. No reason to revdel everything unless requested by the copyright holder. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:46, 18 August 2011 (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.