Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julius Barmat


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 16:18, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Julius Barmat

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )


 * When creating this article the first editor made a reference to the book Vuile oorlog in Den Haag by Rudi Harthoorn but also added "The publisher Van Gruting removed without approval of the author most information about Julius Barmat from the book; the part of the text employed for this lemma, can be consulted in the Municipal Archive of The Hague."

No original research clearly states: "all material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source". This article is based on the section of a draft version the book that publisher decided to remove from the final version. Therefor it is not based on a published source. On February 6 some part of the article was deleted with the remark "cp ed and removal of conspiracy junk" but I'm afraid the rest is still too unreliable. See also previous remarks on the talk page (Talk:Julius Barmat) - Robotje (talk) 22:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete- the article makes a number of assertions in badly-written English, which can't be verified by reference to a published source. www.leugens.nl indicates some of the background to the publisher's removal of material from Harthoorn's book (at least in the machine-translated version!). Ning-ning (talk) 08:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)


 * In the German Wikipedia, Julius Barmat is a redirect to their version of Barmat scandal. In the absence of good secondary sources, that is probably the best thing to do. He seems to be an interesting and definitely notable person, though, evidenced e.g. by this selection of press clippings: (all in German, though). However, unpublished sources surrounded by a conspiracy theory are nothing we should base an article on, so deleting and starting over with a redirect or stub is probably best. —Kusma (t·c) 17:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Apparently the whole business has been surrounded by conspiracy theories from the start. This is a research project of a historian working on it (in German); there is at least one relevant publication (but I haven't managed to find it yet (didn't try very hard though)). —Kusma (t·c) 17:13, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:OR. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm interested that nobody has mentioned the Google searches yet, because they produce a large variety of substantial GBooks hits which look as if they could be used to verify most of the article, at least in broad outline. There is, I will admit, a problem - they have a tendency to contradict one another on certain points, perhaps not surprisingly given the various strong biases that primary sources tend to show about political scandals and their participants. But while this is likely to increase the difficulty of writing an NPOV article on Barmat, it should in no way make him non-notable. I can certainly see good reasons for stubbing or even redirecting the current article, given that it is apparently solely based on an unpublished version of a book that was clearly making political points - but that doesn't negate the fact that Wikipedia needs a proper article on Barmat which goes beyond the political scandal to which he gave his name. PWilkinson (talk) 21:59, 21 July 2012 (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.