Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Collections for Research into Sudeten German Minority (2nd)


 * 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 Speedy delete, WP:CSD: main author requests (sic) deletion. ~ trialsanderrors 23:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Collections for Research into Sudeten German Minority

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

Does not satisfy notability to be an encyclopedic entry, it is a local group studying in the library!

Twice speedied 1st nomination
 * Comment: please note that it was due to the fact that the article was in German and not in English, previous debate should not be impeached.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 20:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment: it is a list of self-published works.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 20:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per above.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 19:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - Behalten Tulkolahtens Privatkrieg gegen unserer Sammlung aus rassistischen Gründen. Gefällt Dir unsere Yad Vashem und Diploma of the Conservation & Environmental Grants program nicht, lieber Tulkolahten? --Dr. Steller 20:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC) Ist es ein Zufall: "Tomuto uživateli je čeština mateřským jazykem."?
 * Comment: strongly beware of personal attacks.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 20:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Warum? Müssen wir noch einmal den Buchstabe N, oder gelbe Stern tragen? --Dr. Steller20:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Please read this good faith.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 20:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * By request, here is a translation of the German remarks: ‘Tulkolahten’s private war against our collection for racist reasons. Do you not like our Yad Vashem and Diploma […] programme, dear Tulkolahten? […] Is this by chance: “Czech is this user’s first language.”[referring to a userbox on Tulkolahten’s user page]? […] Why? Do we have to wear the letter N or a yellow star again?’ (Note: I do not endorse or dispute these statements or their implications.) —xyzzyn 20:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * context: yellow star. ~ trialsanderrors 21:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletions.   -- Agathoclea 20:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:N, no third-party coverage of this research group. Oh, and Dr. Steller, please cease your personal attacks immediately, or you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Sandstein 20:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete after moving to user space. The German article looks like it might be keepable, but the parts current present here aren’t sufficient to establish notability. —xyzzyn 20:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks, I didn't look at the German version of the article. Based on that, it looks like it might very well be notable, but the German article also features no third party coverage. Sandstein 20:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete No outside sources establishing notability and WP:AUTO. -- Agathoclea 20:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The first deletion refered to above was due to the fact that the article was in German. Agathoclea 20:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Note German version de:Sudetendeutsche Wissenschaftliche Sammlung, which has some claims to notability, but also WP:COI issues. No opinion on the article yet, but I warned Dr. Steller on her talk page. ~ trialsanderrors 20:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * German version was created also by Dr.Steller.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 21:11, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I know, hence WP:COI. ~ trialsanderrors 21:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't find outside evidence of notability, willing to reconsider if the extent of the claimed EU support is documented and if Dr. Steller is willing to enter a constructive dialogue rather than personal attacks. ~ trialsanderrors 21:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Sandstein. - Darwinek 21:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If the author is unwilling to cooperate and cite reasons for notibility, then we have no choice but to delete.--Carabinieri 22:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, be aware: User:Dr. Steller once thought I had deleted this article (I'm not even an admin), so she started reverting my edits to unrelated articles (see, , , , and ). It turned out I had only created a redirect to the article, which had not been deleted. I just wanted to mention that so you can be prepared for her doing that again.--Carabinieri 22:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete : zu gut für Wikipedia. --Dr. Steller&amp;nbsp;&#91;&#91;User talk:Dr. Steller&#124;&lt;sup style=&quot;color:lightgreen&quot;&gt;e-mail&lt;/sup&gt;]] 20:27, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, looks like a hoax to me, cannot find any German sources about it, which were independent on German Wikipedia. perhaps there is something, but still it looks rather small and not very notable--Ioannes Pragensis 20:54, 12 January 2007 (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.