Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Government of National Salvation (Serbia)


 * 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. v/r - TP 18:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Government of National Salvation (Serbia)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article is a texbook WP:POVFORK from the Nedić's Serbia article. It was created at this time, without consensus, to prejudice this ongoing discussion on Talk:Nedić's Serbia regarding the subject and title of that article by creating a POVFORK that separates those aspects the user wishes to exclude from the it. It should be noted that the user's disruptive behavior effectively bypasses and disregards all participants and their points of view (essentially derailing the discussion). The user is openly threatening to create more POVFORKS. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 10:10, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It is not WP:POVFORK. Nedić's Serbia article speaks about county while Government of National Salvation (Serbia) speaks about one of its governments, in the same way as we have articles Serbia and Government of Serbia. Besides that, content of Government of National Salvation (Serbia) article is completely new and it is not copy of anything that could be found in Nedić's Serbia article. Also, my behavior is not disruptive. It is User:DIREKTOR who was blocked as many as 8 times because of revert warring: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3ADIREKTOR (I do not think that user who was blocked so many times have right to accuse me for disruptive behavior). I really do not understand why he trying to annihilate this new article that I created. And how exactly I "threatening to create more POVFORKS"??? I simply informed other users that I will create another article, so that empty link that I included into article is not deleted by somebody before I create appropriate article. There is no evidence that second article that I created is POVFORK or that I "threatened" to somebody. This is clear example of personal insult towards me that came from 8 times blocked user:DIREKTOR. PANONIAN  10:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Whether the "country" PANONIAN is talking about existed or not, i.e. whether it was synonymous with the government itself, is exactly the subject being discussed. The user simply created a non-consensus WP:POVFORK, separating them and effectively "creating" a country from a civil government with in a German WWII Military Administration. At a stroke the user "solved" the issue for us all - knowing full well his position is opposed and disputed. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 10:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "Country" or "occupied territory", whatever. You may use definition that you like, but it is not disputed that Nedić's Serbia article speaks about "country/territory" and not about government of that "country/territory". Here is evidence that Nedić's Serbia article was created by user:FrontLine in 2 May 2006 as an article about "nazi puppet state", not about "its government": http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nedi%C4%87%27s_Serbia&oldid=51137486 There is no single evidence that name of this country/territory is "synonymous with the government itself" - this claim is personal POV introduced solely by user:DIREKTOR and I challenge DIREKTOR to provide one single source that would confirm that "name of this country/territory is synonymous with the government itself". So far, we did not a saw a single evidence or source that would support his claims and only "evidence" that we have is his rhetorical repetition of same unsourced statements over and over on various talk pages. Also, I created an new article, so what kind of consensus I would need for creation of new articles? Creation on new articles is completely free for all users and consensus was never needed for that (How to reach consensus about something that does not exist yet?). PANONIAN  10:50, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * This is not the place to continue the discussion from Talk:Nedić's Serbia. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 10:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You opened this discussion here, did you? And what about my challenge? Where is a source that would confirm your claims? PANONIAN  10:59, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, as nominator. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 10:51, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - per my explanation above. PANONIAN  10:50, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - As a content fork. (Redirection is also possible if that is a plausible name.) Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Quotation from content fork: "A content fork is the creation of multiple separate articles all treating the same subject". Now, would you be so kind to explain how one state and its government are same subjects? Should we then delete all other articles about country governments, such as Government of Germany, Government of China, Government of Zambia, etc? Also, here are sources that mentioned WW2 Serbia as puppet state: Source 1: "satellite state of Serbia", Source 2: "The other puppet state, Serbia", Source 3: "German rump state of Serbia", Source 4: "puppet state of serbia". Clearly, it was a state, not "only government". States and governments are two different subjects and Wikipedia have numerous separate articles about state governments, so I do not see why this case should be different. Also, WW2 Serbia had two governments (here is article about first one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissary_Government ) and, although, term "Nedić's Serbia" derived from the name of president of second government, this term in fact covers periods of administration of both governments in literature. Problem with this is that name of parent article about puppet state might not be best solution, but anyway, that article speak about state itself, while article "Government of National Salvation (Serbia)" speaks about government only and it is made in accordance with other government articles, focusing only on list of ministers from the government. This subject is not covered at all in "Nedić's Serbia" article because I translated this list of ministers by myself from source that is provided in the "References" section of the article. PANONIAN  12:13, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions.  — Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:07, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  — Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:07, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Panonian's motives can be questioned all you want, but I don't see how this article is a POV fork. Of what POV? It just lists the member of a series of cabinets. It's fine as is until the general dispute over WWII Serbia is solved. Srnec (talk) 00:26, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said, this FORK was created to prejudice an ongoing discussion. Those who support PANONIAN's position - support the it as well. -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 12:51, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You do not know my motives, so please do not make your assumptions about them. I explained myself and I have no reason to repeat that. However, this is important question: do you want to delete this article because of its content or because of its title? If only title is problem then article could be easily renamed to List of ministers in the Government of National Salvation (Serbia). I will repeat that content of this article is something that I translated by myself from published source and it does not exist anywhere else in Wikipedia. Therefore, there is no single evidence that article content represents any kind of "CONTENTFORK". As I see, accusations for contentfork raised by DIREKTOR are related to article title due to weird idea of this user that WW2 puppet state and its government are one same thing. But, article about WW2 puppet state of Serbia clearly does not contain a list of ministers in the government. So, if only title is problem to DIREKTOR then I do not understand why he opened an deletion proposal instead renaming proposal. I really would like to know what DIREKTOR would like to do with this list of ministers? Just to delete it all? PANONIAN  15:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep This is under construction, as part of agreement on Talk:Nedić's Serbia. Lets keep this until all of us find some solution. It will be easily deleted, but i also dont find it as POV fork. Nedić's Serbia article should be fixed also. -- WhiteWriter speaks 11:33, 9 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per Srnec. PANNONIAN's motives are irrelevant here. This is just a list of cabinets. If this is directly related to the ongoing discussion at Talk:Nedić's Serbia then we should wait for the discussion to end there before doing anything with this article.  Timbouctou ( talk ) 18:42, 9 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep – This is just a list-class article that doesn't violate any policy/guideline of Wikipedia, just to add it is under construction, and I'm not going to comment on other users.  undefined — Bill william compton  Talk   14:31, 12 July 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.