Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henryka Bartnicka-Tajchert


 * 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, notwithstanding claims to the importance of the subject, because there is no showing that reliable sources exist to establish notability or even verifiability. Recreation may be permitted if and only if you can find legitimate reliable sources. postdlf (talk) 19:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Henryka Bartnicka-Tajchert

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Searches for any substantial reliable sources about this person have yielded nothing. Delete as non-notable. 4meter4 (talk) 20:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep for now: Seems like there is a case to be made for notability but the text needs sorting and clarifying. I'll get on it as soon as I can. Quis separabit?  21:05, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. I searched the name in Google. The article is written by a family member who's in charge of http://tajchert.w.interia.pl/ website which is the source of our info. See also: Tajchert Janusz at http://bergenbelsen.co.uk/pages/MediaSources.html linking to his own website with the following quote: "Moja tesciowa Henryka Bartnicka-Tajchert byla wiezniarka obozow Ravensbruck i Bergen-Belsen" (my mother-in-law was a prisoner of Ravensbruck and Bergen-Belsen). Inspired by it, I got to thinking about writing about my own family too. — A. Kupicki (talk) 16:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. We know so little about many who suffered in the concentration camps and it is important to record that history. Here is a case where we do know something, so I am reluctant to delete it without an extensive search for other sources. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  21:15, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment about sourcing. While I certainly think that what Bartnicka-Tajchert's family has done is worthwhile, wikipedia can not use the material on that website as a resource. Please read WP:Sources which states that sources must be independent of the subject. In order to establish the notability of Henryka Bartnicka-Tajchert we need to find and add substantial and reliable sources which are independent of the subject. Per WP:Verifiability, wikipedia is not interested in what is true but what is verifiably true.4meter4 (talk) 21:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * "wikipedia is not interested in what is true but what is verifiably true" is not the correct view. Of course we are interested in what is true. We are writing an encyclopedia. Using WP:Verifiability is just the means we do it. We need sources, I agree. We can use that material (COI is not banned, but it needs care), but we do need other reliable independent sources. What we are really interested in is writing articles on things that people want to know about. You admit that that is the case for this article, so we should be very careful before we delete it. Putting something to AfD is not always the best way to get people to find sources, particularly when they may not be in English. Finding reliable independent sources may not be easy or quick, but they are quite likely to exist somewhere, probably of course not on the internet. What did you do, before nominating this article? I would have sought help from Polish speakers. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  23:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but you and I have a fundamentally different opinion about wikipedia's criteria for sourcing. The statement "wikipedia is not interested in what is true but what is verifiably true" is frankly a non-negotiable axiom per my understanding of wikipedia policy (ie WP:No original research). If the notability of this person can not be verified by independent reliable sources from the subject, than it must be deleted. It is not my responsibility to consult help from anyone. It was the responsibility of the article's initial creator to provide sources about the subject which are independent and reliable. 4meter4 (talk) 00:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I do not think we are as far apart as you think. I do think you did not read what I said carefully or perhaps I could have explained it better. The guideline talk about "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia as "verifiability, not truth.". That is a long way from saying that we are not interested in truth. I agree we need a source. Among the reasons for deletion is "Articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed". This applies here. I do not see that such thorough attempts have been made. If you nominate an article for deletion, where it seems likely that a thorough attempt would find sources, you do have a responsibility to make that attempt. The current reference is OK for content unless someone challenges it. I think it unlikely that anyone will. So let us allow time for people who know where to look on a topic such as this, to do so. A thorough attempt often requires such knowledge of where to look. We are not restricting wikipedia to articles on topics that anyone can find out by 5 minutes on Google. Some topics require use of libraries and reading documents in languages other than English. I wish I had those skills for a topic such as this. Some other topics, yes, but not in this case. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  08:18, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as non-notable. There could be thousands people in Poland with similar biography and I can't see why this one is notable.--Verdin 07:18, 30 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Verdin (talk • contribs)
 * 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.