Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nazi extermination camps and euthanasia centers


 * 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 no consensus. More discussion should take place on the talk page about how to best organize this content.  Sandstein  07:58, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

List of Nazi extermination camps and euthanasia centers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

These are separate phenomena and I don't think a unified list is appropriate, since it implies a greater connection than exists in reality. Both are already listed in more detail and accuracy, separately, at extermination camp and Aktion T4. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  07:02, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  07:02, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  07:02, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I'd be more then willing to vote delete based on the redundancy and apparent lack of good sourcing, but I wonder how an AfD works when it comes to an article that is still being created and is under major editing. Perhaps the nomination was a little premature. Although, I guess it will still have the problems with redundancy once it's finished. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:28, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , I tried to discuss it with the creator (see his talk page), however he disagreed so I thought AfD would be the best place to decide whether the article is redundant (which does not depend on how developed it is). (t &#183; c)  buidhe  07:45, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:16, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per below ( I tried to address your concerns, thanks for any follow up).
 * Editors considering this should take into account the discussion at Talk:List of Nazi concentration camps. It provides important background/context to this article being created.
 * re: "I tried to discuss it with the creator" One comment and one reply and then an AfD all within 1 hour is not really a discussion. Also editors in the original discussion I think should have had input.
 * re: "These are separate phenomena and I don't think a unified list is appropriate since it implies a greater connection than exists in reality." There is a significant and substantial connection between the euthanasia killing centers and extermination camps, in people, preparation, technology, experience. This has been documented in secondary sources such as The Origins of the Final Solution by Christopher Browning, Into That Darkness by Gitta Sereny and The Origins of Nazi Genocide and From Euthanasia to the Final Solution by Henry Friedlander. The connection is also referred to and sourced in Aktion T4. The overwhelming consensus of secondary sources is that they are connected.
 * re "Both are already listed in more detail and accuracy, separately, at..." In terms of accuracy, I'm not sure how you can come to that conclusion since the sources used in the list are from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. There are debates as to numbers, but this has been accounted for by the wording in the sources. This qualifies as a legitimate list as a Summary style meta-article WP:SUMMARY. List >> Extermination Camps >> Chelmno. From WP:SPINOFF "Essentially, it is generally acceptable to have different levels of detail of a subject in different articles, provided that each provides a balanced view of the subject matter." In this case the summary is being created after the detail, but this is only because the editor proposing that this article be deleted, removed the summary content from the list it was originally in. See . I agreed with the suggestion that the information be removed from the original list based on the understanding that "separate new articles/lists are written for the different camp types" . I believe that separate lists were also the choice of and, but they can comment here. There was a very short discussion before  prematurely (imo) ended the discussion on the talk page and made his proposed revision. If the choice was between deleting the content and not splitting it into separate articles I would have been against the deletion and in favor of improving the original article. I from the talk page discussion I think K.e.coffman and Chefallen. If this new article is to be deleted I think the change on the original should be reverted as the consensus for change would be for improvement not deletion.   // Timothy ::  talk  08:27, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * fwiw, I'll generally be holding off on continuing to edit the new article until I see the direction this discussion is heading. Please don't interpret my lack of editing there as abandoning the new article. I may edit and if the changes on the original are reverted in favor of improvement, perhaps the new article material can be merged in.  // Timothy ::  talk  08:41, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , one issue is that you are misinterpreting the source. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/chelmno does not support that "Seven Jews are known have survived by escaping in 1942". It says that they escaped but actually that not all survived.
 * I never said that there wasn't a connection between euthanasia and the extermination camps, but they were fundamentally different entities and it makes little sense to combine them into one list. For similar reasons, List of Nazi concentration and extermination camps makes little sense, as discussed at Talk:List of Nazi concentration camps. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  08:37, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * re: Escape. I wasn't misinterpreting the source, but I wasn't clear on my wording. They survived internment in Chelmno. Some may have been killed later, but they survived long enough for their names and successful escape to be recorded and details of the camp revealed. This is an area where the article can be very simply improved, not an argument for deletion.
 * re: "they were fundamentally different entities". How were they fundamentally different? They were both facilities used by the same people for the extermination of individuals the Nazis considered a threat to the "German race". The former (euthanasia centers) created the technology and experience and developed the people that would be used in the extermination camps. One directly evolved from the other.
 * re: "For similar reasons, List of Nazi concentration and extermination camps makes little sense". The entire purpose of the concentration and extermination camps was different. The grouping them together is apples and oranges. The entire purpose of the euthanasia centers and extermination camps was the same. Apples and apples.
 * re: Sources. I've provided three book length scholarly secondary sources focused on the fundamental connection between the euthanasia centers and extermination camps. Could you provide sources to support 'they were fundamentally different entities".  // Timothy ::  talk  09:22, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The euthanasia centers targeted mostly mentally ill and handicapped people, while the extermination camps were almost exclusively dedicated to the genocide of Jews. The current list elides that fundamental difference. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  09:27, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Both groups were individuals the Nazis considered a threat to the "German race" and therefore they were targeted for extermination. I've provided three book length scholarly secondary sources focused on the fundamental connection between the euthanasia centers and extermination camps. You have not cited any sources.
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disability-related deletion discussions. 09:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. 09:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. 09:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)   // Timothy ::  talk  09:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * If you follow the reasoning that they are somehow connected enough (I'm not saying they are they aren't) to warrant an article, then IMO it at least shouldn't be a list because it's something that needs explaining. Otherwise, it's just seems like a list of two separate ideas with the only connection being the "and" in the tittle. Although, if it was changed to an actual article I don't see how it could be done without it being borderline independent research or editorializing. The problem is, you need reliable sources talking specifically talking about their connection. Not completely different sources on extermination camps then for euthanasia centers that don't even discuss the connection. Otherwise, your the one making the connection, not the sourcing. And it can't just be vague wording like "Nazi's had extermination camps and they had euthanasia centers." That's not a 1/1 correlation worth of an article anymore then it would be to have "List of Nazi extermination camps and air planes" (or whatever), because Nazi's had extermination camps and used air planes. I agree with Buidhe that these are problems inharent with this particular article that can't be solved as it currently is, but maybe not with the subject itself. So, maybe it warrants the AfD. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:01, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * If it were converted into an article it would be even more duplicative of content in Aktion T4 and extermination camp which explains the connection as well as differences. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  10:06, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for your comment. I'll try and address each one of your points.
 * re: Sources - In my original reply I cited three sources. The Origins of the Final Solution by Christopher Browning, Into That Darkness by Gitta Sereny and The Origins of Nazi Genocide and From Euthanasia to the Final Solution by Henry Friedlander. This is discussed in far more sources and if there was a debate on the issue, there would be sources refuting the claim. A brief paragraph in the lead could summarize the connection and cite the sources. The reader could then drill down to the article for a fuller explanation (per the below guidelines).
 * re: Separate article: I'm supporting this as a legitimate list as a Summary style meta-article per WP:SUMMARY and WP:SPINOFF guideline. List >> Extermination Camps >> Chelmno. From WP:SPINOFF "Essentially, it is generally acceptable to have different levels of detail of a subject in different articles, provided that each provides a balanced view of the subject matter."
 * I've provided three sources and two guidelines to support my position. The nominator has provided no sources or guidelines to support their position. Thanks for your consideration.  // Timothy ::  talk  10:27, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I've provided three sources and two guidelines to support my position. The nominator has provided no sources or guidelines to support their position. Thanks for your consideration.  // Timothy ::  talk  10:27, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete For the reasons I stated in my last comment. I have zero problem with the subject, but I don't think a list is the right format for this. As is, it's just a recreation of already existing articles and it's not even clear how the items in the list have anything to do with the topic of the article. Plus, it's mostly prose in list form. Which goes against the point in lists. If you have to write long paragraphs explaining things (that don't even explain anything) then I think your using the list article format wrong. I don't feel the need to have a protracted conversation about it either. Especially since the person who created the article isn't willing to consider other perspectives. Even if they were though, the problems that warrant deletion are inherent in the way the article is setup and can't be remedied through simple edits to it. Such is life sometimes. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:01, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The Template:The_Holocaust list everything already, but a list allows for more information to be given, far more useful than a template or a category. No sense putting these things in separate list, it all about murdering innocent people the Nazi's determined were inferior to them.   D r e a m Focus  11:26, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see anyone here suggesting it should be turned into a category, template, or separate lists. Although, there are already lists that cover what's in here. The suggestion was that it should be a normal article that actually explains the topic. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:36, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see any list covering this. List of Nazi concentration camps does not include this information anymore.  I see it used to  but they removed it and linked to this article, created to hold the information separately.   D r e a m Focus  11:43, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

MERGE Restore where the information was at before, there no point in having it split out like this.  D r e a m Focus  11:43, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * DreamFocus is now suggesting that this list should merge into List of Nazi concentration camps. That would be clearly inappropriate as neither extermination camps nor euthanasia centers were Nazi concentration camps. (see Types of Nazi camps.) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  11:51, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Then rename that article List of Nazi camps then.  D r e a m Focus  11:59, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * A list of Nazi camps would have 40,000+ entries (according to research by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum), which is clearly impractical. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  12:16, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Obviously list articles like this only contain articles that are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles.  D r e a m Focus  13:38, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment if Merge gains a consensus, I agree with that the orignal article should be renamed and reverted to where it was before and the discussion on the talk page that was (imo) prematurely ended continue and gain a clear consensus before changes are made on how to restructure the article. I agreed with  in the talk discsussin that the original article had serious issues. But a consensus is needed for how to improve it.
 * I'm still strongly in favor of Keep. I think splitting the content into different lists so that readers can "drill down" from "Types of Camps" >> "Lists" of different camps by type >> Camp Article >> Camp subcamp articles is acceptable per WP:SUMMARY and WP:SPINOFF as explained above. But I accept whatever the community consensus supports and work to improve whatever structure emerges.
 * Respectfully, one thing that does bother me, I have listed WP:RS and guidelines to back up my position. No one seems to be willing to address this with sources or guidelines. I think this should be addressed. Regardless it will not impact my above commitments.
 * Please let me know with a little advanced time if the article is to be deleted so I can save my most recent changes to assist in the Merge. I will try and keep up to date backups but just in case. Respectfully submitted.  // Timothy ::  talk  12:37, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * No one addressed WP:RS because this isn't and never was about reliable sources. Which should have been pretty obvious. You only made it about that as a way to not talk about what the AfD discussion is actually about. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:50, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Completely wrong. In the nomination it stated: "These are separate phenomena and I don't think a unified list is appropriate, since it implies a greater connection than exists in reality." The nom brought up the connection between the two and I listed RS to show there is a scholarly consensus that the is a strong connection. This is a big part of what this is about.  // Timothy ::  talk  13:01, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Saying that something is connected is very different than saying it's the same, or that editorially it belongs in the same article/list. No one disputes that it's connected. Furthermore, it's not very helpful to the discussion to keep posting the same points over and over again. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  13:07, 15 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge back to List of Nazi concentration camps and Move that article to List of Nazi camps per User:Dream Focus. The existing list article would not be too long as of now for notable entries, but if it does grow too large in the future these other two camp sub-categories would make reasonable WP:SPINOFF articles. 24.151.50.175 (talk) 17:49, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: both types of installations are described in literature as "killing centres"; e.g. re: the so-called euthanasia program, and, re: extermination camps. The two concepts were connected in methods; personnel from one was reassigned to the other, etc. Here's a source that discusses both: "KILLING CENTERS: AN OVERVIEW", from USHMM. So it makes sense to have a list for the topic. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:54, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: The information in this list was removed from the List of Nazi concentration camps on the understanding that it did not fit that category. I think there are two options for this list which contains that spinoff information now: either rename it to List of Nazi killing centers so that it conceptually covers both euthanasia sites and extermination camps which and  have established can fit into one conceptual category with  unchallenged Reliable sources; or split it into two lists - one called List of Nazi extermination camps for those six camps (a short list indeed, but an important one) and one for the somewhat more numerous List of Nazi euthanasia centers. All the lists, however many we decide to have in the end, can and should be linked in a common sidebar. --Chefallen (talk) 04:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Rename to just List of Nazi extermination camps, per K.e.coffman's argument that they are both considered the same. In general, I don't like lists of stuff that does not have its own article, and e don't seem to have an article on Nazi euthanasia centers (maybe User:Buidhe could stub it, or otherwise redirect it where apropriate?). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:10, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , Nazi euthanasia centers are already listed at Aktion T4. Furthermore, there is a list of extermination camps at extermination camp. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  07:12, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Those are articles with lists embedded within that supplement the article's prose content. This is a discussion about stand-alone lists that itemize the instances described at length in those articles (and of course, should also have links to those main topic articles in the lede, and each item on the list should link to the article about it). --Chefallen (talk) 21:10, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * A pure list with no prose would be more acceptable. But that is not what is being developed here. This is a rival not a supplement of better existing articles. Srnec (talk) 17:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. As nom points out, it is just totally redundant. We already covert this better elsewhere. Duplicating it is a bad idea. If consensus favours a List of Nazi killing centers, I would prefer a bare list of links as a navigational aid only over the redundant style of list that is being developed now. Srnec (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is no justification for deletion whatsoever. These subjects are clearly related and hence belong to the page. The euthanasia centers are only briefly mentioned on the page (how that can justify deletion?), and the section about them needs expansion. One might suggest to split the page, but even that would hardly be reasonable.My very best wishes (talk) 16:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The justification is WP:REDUNDANTFORK. —Srnec (talk) 17:14, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I missed it. Keep and merge after discussion to List of Nazi concentration camps. Do not delete because this page provides a lot more information about the specific camps than the List of Nazi concentration camps. My very best wishes (talk) 17:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , Please consider WP:SUMMARY and WP:SPINOFF. (List >> Extermination Camps >> Chelmno). I believe this clarifies that WP:REDUNDANTFORK does not apply here. Thanks <span style="font-family:Courier New, Courier, monospace;"> // Timothy ::  talk  18:05, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think you are right because "concentration camp" and "extermination camp" are not necessarily the same, even though some authors emphasize a lot of similarities. My very best wishes (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge to List of Nazi concentration camps and Move that article to List of Nazi camps WP:ATD-M There is room and no need for stand alone. This is a tangentially WP:REDUNDANTFORK. Lightburst (talk) 17:30, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Respectfully, This is not a WP:REDUNDANTFORK. This qualifies as a legitimate list as a Summary style meta-article. Please see WP:SUMMARY. List >> Extermination Camps >> Chelmno. From WP:SPINOFF "Essentially, it is generally acceptable to have different levels of detail of a subject in different articles, provided that each provides a balanced view of the subject matter." <span style="font-family:Courier New, Courier, monospace;"> // Timothy ::  talk  17:36, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep -- It is useful to have a short list with explanations available for those who do not wish to delve into all the detail. WP commonly has list articles.  I would oppose any attempt to expand this article substantially, as that would result in a redundant duplicate.  It is also useful to have details of the Aktion T4 euthanasia programme place alongside the extermination camps.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:46, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY. It's notable and still being edited. WP:FORK and WP:LIST suggest, but do not require, deletion, where a list can supplement another longer list or a large category for navigation purposes. "Republication is not necessarily a breach of copyright, so long as the appropriate licenses are complied with." "Lists are sometimes the best way to present information." Bearian (talk) 15:49, 22 July 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.