Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helmut Diez


 * 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. The article's subject is found to not be notable. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 02:27, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Helmut Diez

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Just for new participants: I have replaced the (very) old version with a new version. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 15:57, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Lack of notability Rhode Island Red (talk) 21:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * In addition to referring to the article's talk page, please review recent discussion thread at DRN (WP:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard). Rhode Island Red (talk) 21:46, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent)|lambast 00:11, 11 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, the dewiki and wikidata spam will do for this century. –Be..anyone (talk) 09:42, 11 March 2015 (UTC) Updated to dunno for the relist, because "move this to wikibooks" wouldn't be honest. –Be..anyone (talk) 12:11, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, due to lack of notability. Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:26, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Above "delete" vote is cast by nominator, against the norm. When you nominate a page for deletion, it's presumed that you'd vote in favor of the deletion you've requested. Don't stuff the ballot box. Jsharpminor (talk) 03:41, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Where and when was that "norm" established? Surely there's a pertinent policy or guideline that you can point to that backs up your assertion about the norm. If not, you shouldn't be making such accusations about stuffing the ballot box. That's very uncivil. Rhode Island Red (talk) 00:29, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Simply compare these versions: --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - This issue was just discussed at DRN and I was the moderator for the case. I have not examined all of the sources that User:Hans has submitted as evidence of notability but the ones I did examine made it seem like a more thorough examination of the sources and the article, by the community, [was] needed. PS Hans, if you like you can cast a !vote here at AfD in support of the article. Also if you feel you have legitimate sources, you might post them here in a condensed form or link to your sandbox so editors can examine them and make an informed judgement. But it's up to you. Cheers! -- — Keithbob •  Talk  • 21:06, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks Keithbob, I think you made a good job. It was my fault that I did not know your incredibly complicated regulations well enough. As a consequence, I did not see the traps. But I'm not in a hurry. I still know that Diez's works, e.g. his publications, his role in the field of labor and so on, make him a notable personality, and that he is an astonishing generalist. That's why I started the article. If some of the readers are interested they can visit my sandbox. Of course: keep. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 02:14, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Do not delete. This is not necessarily a "keep" vote, but I would like to point out that Rhode Island Red has been blanking every good contribution made to this article simply because he can't read German. I don't know if this article should be kept or not, or if Helmut is in fact notable enough to merit one, but if Rhode Island Red has his way, we'll never get the chance to find out. Jsharpminor (talk) 03:41, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I deleted nothing that was "good". I deleted content, as per WP:BLP, that was unsourced/poorly sourced and badly written to the point of incomprehensibility. You've made a horribly flawed assumption that not understanding German was the basis for the deletion. You can retract that unfounded statement immediately. This bio page just went through DRN and the DRN interlocuter agreed that the article had fundamental problems as I had outlined. I'll also ask you to focus on content and not comment further on what you think I'm thinking or make potshots like "if Rhode Island Red had his way". That's needlessly inflammatory. Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:11, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You did no such thing. What you did was blanking the article. Here, from the very page you linked:
 * Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.
 * Notice the first word there: contentious material. Nothing in the material you deleted was contentious. It possibly falls short of WP:N, but that's the point of AfD discussions like this one. The only thing contentious in this entire discussion is you. Jsharpminor (talk) 00:33, 14 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Some sources available on the Internet show that Helmut Diez is called
 * - "Design Labor Bremerhaven diretto" in Modo 147-153 (1993), p.6. See
 * - "DesignLabor's managing director" in Blueprint 1993, p.106. See
 * - Director of "Einrichtungen zur Designförderung" in the European Design Guide: Agence pour la promotion de la création industrielle APCI (France), 1994. See
 * - "Belegschaftsberater" in Karin Derichs-Kunstmann, Gewerkschaftliche Arbeitslosenarbeit: Erfahrungen, Ergebnisse, Konzepte (1988), p.202. See
 * He is also known as contributor to Otto König, Adi Ostertag, Hartmut Schulz,  "Unser Beispiel könnte ja Schule machen!": das "Hattinger Modell," Existenzkampf an der Ruhr (1985), 156-163, and other publications of this kind. All this suggests that he is internationally recognized as an entrepreneur, professional consultant, coach and designer. Furthermore, the subject has been considered notable enough for a substantial entry in the German Wikipedia, where Diez's notability has not been questioned by other users. However, the English text certainly needs reworking by native speakers. Wikiwiserick (talk) 20:18, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks like we've got a case of sockpuppetry and use of a WP:SLEEPER here. It's time to run a check user on Wikiwiserick and Hans-Jürgen Hübner. Wikiwiserick (who had a history of tendentious editing on similar articles about obscure living German artists) had been silent since October 2013 and then suddenly reawakened the account to chime in on this deletion vote. Rhode Island Red (talk) 05:13, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
 * The first time that we are of the same opinion! Please, try your luck. I would like to come to know this intelligent colleague, who knows a lot about art history - in harsh contrast to you and a bit less harsh to me - and who seems to have made similar experiences with your "strategy". Oh sorry, we are not exactly of the same opionion: Neither HA Schult nor Gotthard Graubner are "obscure" artists. That's what even I know. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 10:41, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Such ridiculous accusations seem to be part of Rhode Island Red's attempts at intimidation which are directed against users who are not of his opinion. However, I am not intimidated, just amused. Wikiwiserick (talk) 18:43, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment: None of the sources above contain more than incidental mention of the bio subject (two of the sources merely mention that Diez was "DesignLabor's managing director") and fall far short of demonstrating notability as per WP's definition. They all lack significant coverage (i.e., detail) about Diez. Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:27, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Further comment: We do apparently have a decent article for him in the German wikipedia. Jsharpminor (talk) 03:46, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Something here isn't as it should be: The old prod full wasn't shown on the talk page, now added. The PROD was allegedly invalid due to an older AFD page still existing on 2015-03-04 (?) But this AFD page is new, created by the nominator on 2015-03-10. Has somebody deleted an older AFD, and if yes, why? It's also unusual to blank major parts of an article before an AFD, this makes it rather hard for others to check how bad the blanked references actually were. I certainly missed it, and compared the remaining stub with dewiki and wikidata. But in this dispute between nominator and main author since 2012 the article sometimes reached epic lengths, and I'm now not more sure if size zero is the "best" size. –Be..anyone (talk) 13:39, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * The ideal length is zero if notability cannot be demonstrated, and to date, despite practically pleading for evidence, notability hasn't even been faintly demonstrated. Rhode Island Red (talk) 16:49, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Answering my own old question: When I look at an old PRODded version that now removed (= contested) PROD tells me that it would be now invalid, because there was (or rather still is) now an AfD. Fatal error on my side, nothing to see, move on. –Be..anyone (talk) 02:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

And to demonstrate this, you even deleted the list of publications. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 17:39, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Now is the time to attempt to demonstrate notability if you think you can. The window of opportunity is closing. Rhode Island Red (talk) 21:10, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not up to you to decide. Only our colleagues can do so. I can't do very much if somebody like you is allowed to delete everything step by step, reduce the article to nothing - and in the end you try to persuade everybody that all of Diez's achievements are not notable, or, if so, has no reliable sources, or, if so, is not in English, is not in the library of Congress or whatever reasons you will invent in the future. I can only hope for common sense - and a horse-sense for lack of fairness, chicanery and arbitrariness. Everybody can follow the article's story, compare the current status with the one in my sandbox. That's all it takes. The article in the form that you are responsible for is simply detrimental for Wikipedia. And believe me, that's really hurtful after eight years of work for this project. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 22:52, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

To end up the demolition of a living personality, my work and the collaborative culture within Wikipedia, I would like to invite the wikipedia public to decide now with a clear yes or no what follows:

- Concerning the notability of a personality in the field of design and architecture it is now time to focus with the following questions...

1. Is a personality notable, if his work is published within the leading journal of architecture and design and other magazines?

Domus (magazine) ISBN: CORNELL 31924068467376 language: it date: 1993-10 753 DOMUS 6 OTTOBBE '33 DesignLabor, Bremerhaven (Brema), 1 maggio-16 luglio 1993 Sprtatfields, London, settembre-ottobre Curatori: Karin-Beate PhilHs, Liz Farrelly, Helmut Diez Allestimento: Helmut Diez, Henning Krohn, Thomas ... or in other leading magazines, like Blueprint (architecture magazine) or Der Spiegel 

2. Is a personality notable which organizes and designs the biggest show of British Design on the Continent?

″größte Werkschau britischer Möbeldesigner des 20. Jahrhunderts″ (Sonntagsmagazin, ARD 1993-05-05, KulturBuffet, N3, Gerd Röhlke, Jürgen Schöffel: Visions in the swim and VOX (features)).

"In the swim": in mostra 57 giovani designer inglesi, in: DOMUS, 753, Mailand, Oktober 1993, p. 6-7 (among the „curatori“ Helmut Diez, in addition responsible for „allestimento“ (Inszenierung)). Perspectives, in: Blueprint. The leading Magazine of Architecture and Design, London, june 1993 („The installation .. was realised by Designlabor's managing director Helmut Diez“). Blueprint. The Leading Magazine of Architecture and Design. British Design's big splash, in: Blueprint, june 1993, S. 6 („Design Labor’s Managing Director Helmut Diez“).

3. Is a personality notable which as the head of a relevant design institution developed the only German scholarship for postgraduates in Design and architecture?

„Diez hat ein Modell entworfen, in dem sich künftig Stipendiat/Innen "im Sinne einer Spitzenförderung" in Bremerhaven fortbilden sollen“ (Thomas Wolff: Floßfahrt per Computer, in: Tageszeitung, 20th of july 1994, p. 19).

4. Is a personality notable which is managing a design institution together with personalities like François Burkardt, former director of Paris's Centre Pompidou, editor of Domus, editor of Crossing etc.)? (Künstlerlexikon Saar: Burkhardt, François)

5. Is a personality notable which is directing design workshops with more than 50 Designers and heads of leading global furniture producers like Carl Magnusson, Phillip Thonet (managing shareholder of Gebrüder Thonet etc.)

„Another element of the nexus of mutual benefit was the workshops, held at the show's opening weekend. An impressive group of international industrialists - Carl Magnusson, president of design for Knoll international, Sergio Buttiglieri, productmanager for Driade/Aleph, Anthologie-Quartett's art director Rainer Krause, Phillipe Thonet from Thonate, and Paul Jensen, Fritz Hansen's international sales director - worked with the designers over two days, examining the pieces and discussing their suitability for marketing. A highly charged and intensely creative atmosphere was generated...“, DOMUS No. 753/Album, Gio Ponti, Oktober 1993, S. 6-7.

„Diez invited manufacturers with contrasting product ranges and philosophies including Paul Mygind Jensen from Fritz Hansen, Philippe Thonet, Sergio Buttiglieri of Driade, Rainer Krause of Anthologie Quartett and Carl Magnusson of Knoll (company)Knoll...“ (Blueprint 1992, p. 72.)

6. Is a personality notable which develops together with postgraduates on a pre-competitive basis an important regional traffic system - like a longitudinal high speed ferry system with all components - ships, tidal jetty systems, frequencies, integration into regional traffic systems, marketing concept and realizing consortium ?

Weserbus: Working on water, in: FX Magazine, Fast and Forward, february 1995, p. 23. "Laborleiter Helmut Diez" (Frische Brise statt Abgasmief. Der "Weserbus" legt an – zunächst mal als Designstudie für ein neues Verkehrssystem, in: Die Tageszeitung, 16th of july 1994, p. 35).

7. Is a personality notable which erects a new pre-competitive studying field like Sound Design - 20 years ago?

"60 % der Menschen leiden unter vegetativen Störungen durch akustische Umweltverschmutzung", sagt der Leiter des Designlabors Bremerhaven, Helmut Diez … Klanggestaltung heißt das Studienfeld …, das dem Lärm des Maschinenzeitalters zu Leibe rücken will.“ (Hagen Hastert: Das Geräusch als Nervenprobe. Klang-Gestaltung, Designlabor BHV, in: Die Tageszeitung, 19th of january 1993, p. 20).

8. Is a personality notable which develops an analytical matrix after extracting hundreds of labour medical studies concerning still millions of people worldwide bearing heavy loads and which develops design strategies to minimize risks - as a governmental study featured by the government of North Rhine Westfalia? (Leitbilder sozialverträglicher Technikgestaltung - Ergebnisbericht des Projektträgers zum NRW-Landesprogramm Sozialverträgliche Technik — Gestaltung und Bewertung -

Humanisierungstechniken für den Bereich Heben und Tragen schwerer Lasten, Institut für Arbeit und Technik, bis 2005, ISBN 3-89368-014-4.

9. Is a personality notable which designs a hotel on high standard within a treehouse concept and which gains a worldwide feedback from Japan to New York, being awarded and ranges among the top ten worldwide, finding its way into two important book publications within shortest time? (Philip Jodidio:: Architecture Now! Small is Beautiful), , , , , ("Interior Design: Helmut Diez, Bremen").

10. Is a personality notable which plans and influences the city development of Istanbul since 2003 and which is now involved again as the head of his own consortium in the masterplanning for the most historical part of the Mediterranean Sea - of Constantinople, Byzantium, Istanbul

The topics 1 to 7 were realized by Helmut Diez within less than two years of his worklife. The study in question 8 took him half a year. The project under n. 9 lasted 4 months. - His life-project in Istanbul takes him now 12 years.

Please let me as wikipedia author of more than 800 articles in the German wikipedia put now two questions to our community:

A. Is the article shown currently and thanks to Rhode Island Red under Helmut Diez bearable for wikipedia? - Yes or no?

B. And is Helmut Diez notable to be subject of an English wikipedia article? - Yes or no?

And as a summary: Helmut Diez is not a specialist but a generalists with interdivisionary and visionary approaches in different fields - above is only shown a selection of design and architectural works. He is head of a THINK TANK - and not easy to press into narrow categories.

That's what everybody has to think about, not about the usual tricks and contortions of Rhode Island Red. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 10:07, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * It would have been nice if you could have simply posted that without the personal barb against me, but oh well; hopefully you'll com to your senses and learn to be civil eventually. Can you answer one simple question before we start sifting through the rubble -- i.e., what are you claiming the subject is notable as? You've thrown in everything but the kitchen sink above and it looks like the building blocks of a resume, not an encyclopedia article. Again, what are you claiming is the primary area of the subjects' notability; how would that first summary sentence look: "Helmut Diez is...X,y, z"? During the DRN you asserted that he's notable as a "record producer and artist", but that assertion did not stand up to scrutiny, and now you seem to have abandoned that angle entirely.
 * The links you provided above seem to imply that you now think he's notable for something else (a design gallery manager? a developer of "analytical matrices"? A "regional traffic system" developer?) but what that is is unclear. Also the sources you provided above do not include any legitimate hyperlinked content. None of the links you provided even mention Diez. The other sources are offline German sources and you did not provide any direct quotes to support your assertions. That will be necessary at a minimum to vene begin to attempt to sort out what you've posted. This is the same process we tried to get you to go through on the Talk page and in DRN, and you've been either unwilling or unable to comply. The onus is clearly on you to establish clear notability and proper detail and context for the content which you are hoping to include. Rhode Island Red (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * We should not mix up three questions again. The first thing that the comunity should decide - and please, shut up until we have heard what the comunity decides - is, if a personality with the achievements mentioned above is notable or not. If not: deletion, if yes: sources and reliability of those sources. You have shown, that every other way is a long path of traps. And we should no longer waste our time. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 19:04, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I am part of the community of which you speak, and you don't do yourself any favors by telling WP editors to shut up. I am not the only editor to question the notability of Diez; pretty much everyone who has commented to date has done so. Ten trivial accomplishments don't add up to one notable accomplishment, so I am asking again, what is Diez putative primary area of notability in your eyes? What will would the opening sentence of the article look like, e.g., Diez is...?" Rhode Island Red (talk) 19:55, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Given what you've written above about Diez, it seems like you might have more luck trying to write an article about IPM (assuming it's notable) and weaving Diez into the narrative. He definitely doesn't not seem notable enough in his own right for a stand alone bio. WP doesn't really have a category for "generalists", at least not for jacks of al trades who haven't accomplished anything notable by WP standards. Rhode Island Red (talk) 19:59, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

You have tried this kind of manipulation with other authors in the same manner. Let the community decide. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 21:17, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You really need to take a less adversarial tone and focus on the editorial issues at hand. There is no justification for some of the things you've been saying, which are crossing into the the realm of personal attacks and harassment. Seriously, kindly try to temper your frustration and be more diplomatic in your approach. Rhode Island Red (talk) 22:32, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * To answer your recurrent thematic question above, i.e., "Is a personality notable if..." the answer in every case is probably not, but perhaps. You'd have to provide much more context and more detailed excerpts of the relevant text. From what I've seen above, my answer would be no. Rhode Island Red (talk) 22:37, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Please, stop repeating your opinion again and again. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 05:12, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I simply answered the question you posed above. You seem to be playing the game of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. The community keeps saying the same thing to you over and over and you keep ignoring it. The moderator at DRN pointed out the key problems with the article and you've done nothing to correct them. Someone filed a frivolous ANI, and even that brought the same feedback, which you again are ignoring: "The 'good version' needs to be better sourced as was pointed out by Rhode Island Red here. My suggestion is that the user who brought the ANI close the discussion with apology for inadequate sourcing, fix the sourcing problems, show us a 'good version' that is properly sourced, and let us see where we are then." You still have not come anywhere close to demonstrating notability of the bio subject; the text is still largely incomprehensible, and the article still reads like a poorly written inadequately sourced resume -- it falls far short of meeting WP standards in pretty much every respect. Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:21, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

We know your personal opinion. Stop wasting our colleagues' time. The probably better version is here, but that's also mentioned above. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 16:35, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not just my opinion. It's the same opinion expressed by at least 3 editors that have looked into this so far. I pointed this out above but you seem to not want to listen. Seems like you have finished presenting evidence that you deem to demonstrate notability. IMO, you have not come any closer to doing so. Fortunately the article has been relisted for deletion to generate a more thorough consensus. That's a good thing. Let's see how it plays out. I'll remind you again to tone the hostility. Kindly restrict your comments to content, not other editors. Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 04:01, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, I know what the article talks about near Porst group, but this is a red link on enwiki, nobody outside of the former West Germany or younger than 50 years has the faintest idea about this "communist" experiment, and it can't be covered in an article about Helmut Diez or FWIW dolphins.
 * Something like "regional relevance" might exist, there is no deletion request on dewiki. Any red links incl. one red link with a reference in the lede should go for the duration of the AfD, and if some sections end up with no reference they should also go for the duration. You can re-insert it later if the result is "keep", at the moment it's counter-productive. –Be..anyone (talk) 02:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete -- I've read all of the comments above and I find no compelling reason to keep this BLP.
 * Each WP has its own standards and there are thousands of articles on English WP that don't appear on the German WP and vica versa. So having a German WP article is meaningless in this discussion.
 * I haven't seen any original sources in the English language. While WP allows secondary sources in other languages when no English source is available, this article, if allowed, would be based solely on non-English sources most of which would not have a URL to allow Google translation. I find this to seriously compromise WP:V which is a pillar of this project.
 * The minor, less than one sentence mentions in several books cited by one of the KEEP votes above in no way confers notability. Sources that refer to Diez as a "staff consultant" or "managing director" of a non-notable magazine are not the basis for an article..
 * Other links provided by other editors are equally non-notable and in many instances I can't even find Diez's name on the page(s) being linked to.
 * WP:Notability (people) "requires significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" I don't see anything even approaching significant coverage in any of the more than one dozen sources I have taken the time to research, translate and examine.
 * Furthermore, since no comprehensive biographical source has been provided (despite specific requests) I question whether all of these minor mentions of someone named Helmuth Diez are the same person.
 * Lastly, since the most common claim for Diez's notability is his creative work I think WP:Artist applies. That guideline says that to qualify for notability an artist must be:
 * regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
 * known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
 * created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
 * The person's work (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
 * I don't see any way that this person meets our English WP guidelines for notability and inclusion. I therefore support the deletion of this article and and end to this drama which has crossed multiple venues and wasted a lot of editor time. -- — Keithbob •  Talk  • 15:19, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I couldn't agree more with Keithbob's deft synopsis. It echoes what I've been saying about this BLP subject for quite some time now. Rhode Island Red (talk) 00:24, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear Keithbob, your intervention here casts doubts on your neutrality during the DRN. That's a pity. - Indirectly you don't accept german sources, and you don't really accept offline sources. If the majority of the boys here simply makes up a congregation of only english readers, only screen readers and nobody dares to enter a library, Wikipedia will become an addendum of Google. Good luck! --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 07:31, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Remember: "Editors should not use machine translations of non-English sources in contentious articles or biographies of living people." --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 07:42, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * As I did not want to alter the original text, I mentioned three times that you should visit my sandbox. There, you'll find everything that makes Diez notable, including reliable sources. A list of my "unreliable" sources is going to follow. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 09:54, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Last not least, Keithbob, again you simply mix up "artists" with "Creative professionals", that means, as you can see following your own link: "Authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals". Isn't it simply an arbitrary choice to select the artist? Although everybody can see that Diez was creative in several fields and a very pioneering author, head of a think tank? In front of this background, each administrator should keep in mind the following criteria:

"# The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
 * 1) The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
 * 2) The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
 * 3) The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums." --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Last hints, probably not without relevance for our administrators, just to show that most of the above mentioned "reasons" are simply not true. The article in my sandbox contains seven sources in English in the footnotes alone, although this is not necessary, and about thirty in German. Here we go:


 * DOMUS No. 753/Album, Oktober 1993, p. 6-7


 * Weserbus: Working on water, in: FX Magazine (ed.): Fast and Forward, february 1995, p. 23


 * Perspectives, in: Blueprint. The leading Magazine of Architecture and Design, London, Juni 1993 ("The installation .. was realised by Designlabor's managing director Helmut Diez")


 * British Design's big splash, in: Blueprint, june 1993, p. 6 ("Design Labor’s Managing Director Helmut Diez").


 * "… and The music is packed with ideas which address jazz as being at the centre of a web of musical approaches which all have a bearing on the next music’s next move (or two). The computer and Emulator are perfectly contextualized, the large ensemble .. integrate with an unprecedented sensitivity …" (Tom Corbin, in: The Wire, issue 70/71, 1990


 * Resort Baumgefluester, Departures


 * Baumraum: Tree Whisper Tree-House Hotel, Bad Zwischenahn, Germany, in: Philip Jodidio (ed.): Taschen, 2014, pp. 266-271.

German (not complete):


 * Cited for example by Armin Höland, Jürgen Daviter, Volkmar Gessner, Zentrum für Europäische Rechtspolitik, European Commission (ed.): Forschungs- und Aktionsprogramm zur Entwicklung des Arbeitsmarktes. Rechtliche, steuerliche, soziale und administrative Hindernisse für die Entwicklung örtlicher Beschäftigungsinitiativen, vol. II: Fortführung von Krisenunternehmen durch die Belegschaften, Luxemburg 1986, p. 34 (online, pdf).


 * Rainer Duhm, Eckhardt Hildebrandt, Ulrich Mückenberger, Eberhardt Schmidt (ed.): Wachstum alternativ. Kritisches Gewerkschaftsjahrbuch 1983/84, Berlin 1984, p. 55ff., esp. p. 62.


 * Otto König, Adi Ostertag, Hartmut Schulz: "Unser Beispiel könnte ja Schule machen!". Das "Hattinger Modell" Existenzkampf an der Ruhr, Bund-Verlag, 1985


 * Filmed at Hattingen (Der Konsul ist schon lange tot. Betriebsbesetzung bei Mönninghoff in Hattingen, part of Diez's speach - "Helmut Diez - Betriebsberater" - starting at 1:30:37.


 * Rainer Duhm, Désirée Kamm: Wenn Belegschaften ihre Betriebe übernehmen. Probleme und Chancen selbstverwalteter Fortführung von Krisenbetrieben, Francfort, New York 1990, e.g. p. 95ff.


 * Rainer Duhm: Andere Produkte anders produzieren. Die Bremer Voith-Belegschaft auf dem Weg in die Selbstverwaltung, in: Rainer Duhm, Eckhardt Hildebrandt, Ulrich Mückenberger, Eberhardt Schmidt (edd): Wachstum alternativ. Kritisches Gewerkschaftsjahrbuch 1983/84, Berlin 1984, p. 32–54


 * "Laborleiter Helmut Diez" (Frische Brise statt Abgasmief. Der "Weserbus" legt an – zunächst mal als Designstudie für ein neues Verkehrsystem, in: Die Tageszeitung, 16th of july 1994, p. 35).


 * Erstarrte Welle ... Eine Möbel-Werkschau in Bremerhaven zeigt neues britisches Spitzendesign, in: Der Spiegel, 3rd of may 1993. There it says: "vom DesignLabor Bremerhaven veranstaltet[en] Schau" and "Bei der größten Werkschau britischer Möbelformer, die jemals auf dem europäischen Kontinent stattgefunden hat" (transl.: At the greatest 'Werkschau' that ever happened on the european continent).


 * "Der ‚Unauflöslichkeit zwischen Kunst und Frieden‘ war die Aktion gewidmet, in deren Rahmen der Kulturpreis der Villa Ichon erstmals verliehen wurde. Für die Friedensinitiative Ostertor nahmen Peter Abromeit, Helmut Diez und Gustav Gisiger den mit 10.000 Mark dotierten Preis entgegen.“ (Kunst als lebendige Bestürzung. Kunstpreis der Villa Ichon erstmals an Theater Friedensaktion verliehen, in: Weserkurier, 14th of march 1983).


 * Außergewöhnliches Hotel in Bad Zwischenahn Insa Otteken eröffnet erste Baumhaus-Suiten


 * Resort Baumgeflüster ("Interior Design: Helmut Diez").


 * book review


 * Freeport L’affaire Flibustier, in: Jazzthetik, march 1990; there it says: "ein gewaltiges Werk … produced by Helmut Diez"


 * Humanisierungstechniken im Bereich Heben und Tragen schwerer Lasten. Konzeptstudie für Produktinnovationen, ed.: Minister für Arbeit, Gesundheit und Soziales des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen ("Projektbearbeiter: Helmut Diez")

Here Diez's publications:

Works


 * Gründung eines Belegschaftsvereins, in: Otto König, Adi Ostertag, Hartmut Schulz: "Unser Beispiel könnte ja Schule machen!". Das "Hattinger Modell" Existenzkampf an der Ruhr, Bund-Verlag, 1985, pp. 156–163. ISBN 978-3-76630-924-2
 * "Helmut Diez, Belegschaftsberater": "Angst vor dem langen Feierabend". Die Berufsbildungsstätte, in: Otto König, Adi Ostertag, Hartmut Schulz: "Unser Beispiel könnte ja Schule machen!". Das "Hattinger Modell" Existenzkampf an der Ruhr, Bund-Verlag, 1985, pp. 186–95. ISBN 978-3-76630-924-2
 * with Michael Grauvogel: Ratgeber für Belegschaften, Münster 1983.
 * with Michael Grauvogel: Gründung eines Belegschaftsvereins, in: Hans Ziegenfuß, Heiner Heseler, Hans-Jürgen Kröger (ed.): "Wer kämpft kann verlieren, wer nicht kämpft hat schon verloren", Hamburg 1984, pp. 259–60. ISBN ISBN 3-87975-259-1
 * with Michael Grauvogel: Als sie aber vor die Tore der Fabrik gesetzt wurden, gewannen sie mehr freie Zeit als ihnen lieb war, Resumée in: Rainer Duhm, Eckhardt Hildebrandt, Ulrich Mückenberger, Eberhardt Schmidt (ed.): Wachstum alternativ. Kritisches Gewerkschaftsjahrbuch 1983/84, Berlin 1984 (60 pages) ISBN 978-3-8802-2084-3
 * Humanisierungstechniken für den Bereich Heben und Tragen schwerer Lasten, Institut für Arbeit und Technik, im Auftrag des Ministers für Arbeit, Gesundheit und Soziales des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Hamburg, march 1987. (110 pages) ISBN 978-3-8797-5259-1
 * with Désirée Kamm, Corinna Ligowski, Jürgen Dohrmann: Auswirkungen des Beschäftigungsförderungsgesetzes, in: Arbeitsrecht im Betrieb 1991, p. 409-11.
 * Die Kooperativ-Service-GmbH, in: Marlene Kück, Achim Lösch (ed.): Finanzierungsmodelle selbstverwalteter Betriebe, Campus Francfort/New York 1987, pp. 209–18. ISBN 978-3-5933-3785-2
 * Karin-Beate Phillips, Liz Farrelly, Blueprint, London and Helmut Diez, Designlaobor Bremerhaven: In the Swim. An Exhibition of Creative Design from the British European Design Group. Ausstellung im DesignLabor Bremerhaven vom 2. Mai bis 30. Juni 1993, Catalogue as special edition of Blueprint. Zeitschrift für Architektur und Design, 1993. (WorldCat)
 * Kriterien zur Leistungsbeurteilung von Hilfswerken, Gemeinnützigkeit und Management, Unabhängiger Informationsdienst, Gabler Verlag, Nr. 41 (1997)
 * with Peter Behr, Bianka Hofmann, Michael Scheer: First Flow. Der erste Kontakt mit Pilotwalen, Bremen: Behr, Hofmann U. Scheer Gb, 2001. ISBN 3-00-007619-0
 * Contribution for Golden Horn Project, Music and movie by Helmut Diez

Bibliography
 * Wolfgang J. Schmidt-Reinecke (ed.): Skizzen und Porträts aus Bremerhaven, Publicon-Verlag, Freiburg 1994, p. 46 (ISBN 9783929092400 and 3-929092-40-9).

'''My last question: Why are there only english speaking votings, exactly those guys that don't understand the text, the sources, the underlying culture? And even our own regulations!''' --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 16:28, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Please add the ISBN numbers to the relevant section in the article. And check that the author or co-author is really Helmut Diez, books featuring or mentioning Diez don't belong into the same section as books written by Diez. If the article survives this AFD it should be a decent BLP per WP:BLP, not some epic link collection. –Be..anyone (talk) 17:21, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * This "epic" link collection has its roots in Rhode Island Red's distrust and his contortions, and I was forced to "source" nearly everything. Believe me, this is only a selection. In the list of his works you will find only works by H. D. and works that he has written together with the mentioned authors. And these publications are noteworthy because they were pioneering in their fields of research. Question: Why should I insert the ISBN numbers, if they are in his work's list? As far as I can see, there is only one title with an ISBN in the footnote section. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 17:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Just to inform you: The only reason why I did not (yet) replace the article with the one in my sandbox is the very bad experience that Rode Island Red is allowed to revert anything I change. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 18:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * “Dear Keithbob, your intervention here casts doubts on your neutrality during the DRN.”
 * Please comment on content and editorial issues, not other editors. You have been cautioned about this repeatedly.
 * “Indirectly you don't accept german sources, and you don't really accept offline sources. If the majority of the boys here simply makes up a congregation of only english readers, only screen readers and nobody dares to enter a library”
 * You have been told repeatedly that German sources are acceptable in theory, but the ones you have presented to date are all offline and seem to contain only incidental mention of the subject (some don’t even mention the subject at all). I am yet to see a single statement in any of these sources that established notability. Putting the onus on WP editors to track down obscure offline sources in German, many or most of which are not even available in any public library in the U.S., violates the spirit of WP:V.
 * “these publications are noteworthy because they were pioneering in their fields of research.”
 * Noteworthy and pioneering to whom exactly? You have made this assertion repeatedly, but the evidence you have provided to date does not support the opinion of a lone WP editor. Rhode Island Red (talk) 20:41, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Did I really make the impression that I wanted to talk with you? --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 21:14, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * If you choose not address the concerns raised, it will make the process of deleting due to lack of notability that much simpler. As Keithbob said it's time to put an "end to this drama which has crossed multiple venues and wasted a lot of editor time." Rhode Island Red (talk) 21:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Regarding the following source cited by Hans:
 * “Cited for example by Armin Höland, Jürgen Daviter, Volkmar Gessner, Zentrum für Europäische Rechtspolitik, European Commission (ed.): Forschungs- und Aktionsprogramm zur Entwicklung des Arbeitsmarktes. Rechtliche, steuerliche, soziale und administrative Hindernisse für die Entwicklung örtlicher Beschäftigungsinitiativen, vol. II: Fortführung von Krisenunternehmen durch die Belegschaften, Luxemburg 1986, p. 34 (online, pdf).”
 * This is exactly the kind of substandard sourcing that’s causing problems and wasting our time. The only mention of Diez in that entire 284 page document is a footnote which says simply: “aus: Helmut Diez, Michael Grauvogel, Ratgeber für Belegschaften, MS 1983”.
 * Hans clearly doesn’t understand WP’s sourcing policy despite having had it explained to him over and over again ad nauseam. It seems to be a striking case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. This tail chasing exercise really needs must come to a close quickly lest we waste any more resources on this fruitless quest. The antagonistic comments he keeps making about other editors only adds fuel to the fire and makes our task more difficult -- it is WP:TE to the extreme. Rhode Island Red (talk)
 * That is exactly one of these cases, where your lack of foreign languages missleads you. You don't understand that this is a schema, central for this article about innovation, produced for the European Commission. You are unable to read the sources properly. By the way Michael Grauvogel was vice-president of the Landesarbeitsgericht Bremen until 2013. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 10:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
 * This has nothing to do with my understanding of German. It has to do with your misunderstanding of what constitutes notability according to WP policy. The source you presented doesn't even include a single sentence of information about Diez. It merely contains a single footnote on a single page that lists nothing more than his name, once. That is not substantial coverage and it does not demonstrate notability. Rhode Island Red (talk) 18:59, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Of course, this has something to do with your understanding of German. Otherwise you would have realized that the paper by Diez and Michael Grauvogel cited by the European Commission contributed in no small degree to their decisions. As far as I can see, there is also an article about one of Diez's recent design projects in the manager magazine Creditreform, published by the prestigious Handelsblatt, saying that Diez created, with architect Andreas Wenning, four tree houses. See . Furthermore, the book In the Swim: An Exhibition of Creative Design from the British European Design Group shows that Diez is internationally recognized as a designer. See . And he is listed as the director of a design institute in the European Design Guide. At least, all this suggests that he is notable enough for an entry in the English Wikipedia. Wikiwiserick (talk) 19:45, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

"Of course, this has something to do with your understanding of German. Otherwise you would have realized that the paper by Diez and Michael Grauvogel cited by the European Commission contributed in no small degree to their decisions.”

Again, it’s not my understanding of German that’s the problem. The claim you make above is WP:OR. Nowhere in the document does it include the statement you made. Those are your words, not the words of the source; that’s the problem.

“As far as I can see, there is also an article about one of Diez's recent design projects in the manager magazine Creditreform'', published by the prestigious Handelsblatt, saying that Diez created, with architect Andreas Wenning, four tree houses. See .”''

I wouldn’t say there’s anything prestigious about the article or the source, and it’s only a two-paragraph blurb that mentions Diez’s name in passing once in reference to the tree house suites. According to previous iteration of the Diez bio, he was responsible for the interior design. I wouldn’t dismiss this as a potentially usable source. It’s one of the only ones presented yet that’s available online. But it doesn’t provide significant depth of coverage nor does it establish notability according to WP:BIO. I’ts still not clear what the primary basis is for Diez putative notability. If it’s doing interior design on these treehouse suites, I don’t think that’s going to pass the test.

"Furthermore, the book In the Swim: An Exhibition of Creative Design from the British European Design Group shows that Diez is internationally recognized as a designer. See . At least, all this suggests that he is notable enough for an entry in the English Wikipedia"

Can you provide a specific portion of the book’s text says that Diez is internationally recognized as a designer, or are those your words again? The point of this exercise is to put forth specific (and reliably sourced) text. A WordCat bibliographic entry alone isn’t helpful for the purpose of this exercise, and it doesn’t demonstrate notability. Also, remember that WP:NPF states: "...exercise restraint and include only material relevant to the person's notability, focusing on high-quality secondary sources." So unless Diez's primary basis for notability is as an interior designer, it wouldn't qualify for inclusion. The current version of the article contains a hodgepodge list of disparate and unrelated activities, and none of them really seem notable at all; tree house interior design included. A jack of all trades perhaps, but apparently not a master of any, at least judging by the shallow depth of coverage he's received. Rhode Island Red (talk) 02:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I am no expert on Diez and I do not own a copy of the design catalog, In the Swim. So I cannot cite from this book. But I can read German texts, and the many sources given by Hans-Jürgen Hübner suggest that the man is notable for his life's work as a designer, entrepreneur, professional consultant, and coach, as he was, and is, responsible for many different projects in Germany and abroad. Wikiwiserick (talk) 13:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Just a repetition of "reasons". Online sources are not necessary. Please visit a library. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 05:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Everybody can read that it's always your behavior that I've got in mind. I had to learn that you are not interested in fairness or the truth, or even the sake of this project. You believe in the force of contortions and lawyering and you acted the same way in other occasions for years. To give only a few examples:

Talk:HA_Schult/Archives/2012/August, Talk:HA_Schult/Archives/2012/September, Talk:HA_Schult/Archives/2013/April, Talk:Gotthard_Graubner This might give our readers an idea, why it is senseless to discuss with you, Rhode Island Red. You have simply no idea of notability, you are too illiterate for an adequate participation in important fields, you are too lazy to visit a library. With only three hours of reserch you try to destroy a work of months. That's what you don't want to hear, but that's why I believe, that nobody should try to discuss with you on the grounds of AGF in the future. And: Of course it's still important to discuss with the rest of the audience! N. b.: Even if I have criticized Keithbob, I still believe in his good faith. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 03:09, 25 March 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment This AfD is in desperate need of collapses.&#8213; Padenton &#124;&#9993;  01:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I think, everything is said and done now. Every neutral and openminded Wikipedian, who is prepared to take action solely for the sake of this phantastic project, has got a sufficient basis for an adequate decision now. The last thing I can offer is to replace the very old version with the new one in my sandbox. I will leave Germany for a couple of days on monday, and I am not shure, if I'll have WLAN overthere. Anyway, Thanks a lot for your patience. --Hans-Jürgen Hübner (talk) 12:39, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per Wikipedia's fundamental principles, Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. This is a bloated mess of overblown puffery misrepresenting sources and exaggerating achievements. get rid of it. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:48, 2 April 2015 (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.