Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brownshirt tactics


 * 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   delete.  MBisanz  talk 23:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Brownshirt tactics

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I originally proposed the deletion of this page; it was deleted and subsequently re-created by the original author. My concerns remain largely the same as they were then: Basically, the article is not useful as currently constituted, and I don't see evidence of scholarly sources that would let us write a good article about "brownshirt tactics". Delete or redirect to Sturmabteilung. Choess (talk) 23:41, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) the article is poorly referenced (one of the four references is tangential and the other three simply refer to uses of the term).
 * 2) there does not appear to be an accepted definition of what actions constitute "brownshirt tactics". There are few similarities between the tactics mentioned above; it appears to be simply a colorful political pejorative rather than a scholarly term.
 * 3) the definition as currently given in the article does not appear to be accurate. The article claims that "the link between the message and the one benefiting from the action must not be revealed," which strikes me as being 100% nonsense in describing the original brownshirts, who do not seem to have gone to great pains to conceal their association with the Nazi Party.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —94.196.22.232 (talk) 12:28, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The definition used in this article is insufficiently sourced. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * If this is just a re-creation from a previous deletion, then isn't this a speedy delete G4? And a suggestion to Lindorm to userfy it if they want to improve it so it doesn't get deleted again? --Grev (talk) 02:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a recreation of an article that was deleted via proposed deletion, not AFD. CSD G4 doesn't apply to these. AAMOF it would have been undeleted on the request of the original author or anybody else. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, seems to be written mostly to express the author's opinion. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. J I P  | Talk 08:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: non-notable -- no non-trivial coverage of the term, no sources covering the actual tactics of the Sturmabteilung. The article is simply WP:OR combined with citations of the use of the phrase. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 16:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Sturmabteilung. Plausible search term via its use as metaphor.  Also, redirects are cheap. Serpent&#39;s Choice (talk) 20:30, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * If there is no interest in improving the article then by all means delete it. At least time there has been a debate, last time it was just deleted without it (as far as I know). Redirecting to Sturmabteiling and including a paragraph there seems to me the best choice then.--Lindorm (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2009 (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.