Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthias Politycki


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 17:31, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Matthias Politycki

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Almost entirely unsourced, except the subject's personal website, a national library catalogue, two YouTube links to a short video by the subject and a reading by the subject. A Google search only gives one possible reliable secondary source on him by a local German newspaper:, so the article fails WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. Beyond the fluff, the author does not qualify for WP:AUTHOR and fails WP:ANYBIO having won two minor prizes and being long-listed for the Independent Foreign Fiction Prize once. It doesn't help that all of the contributions to the article were from three SPAs (Jabel2150, Corvuslibri, 85.176.22.138). MarkH21 (talk) 22:02, 1 February 2019 (UTC),
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  Ruyaba   (talk)  00:53, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:47, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:47, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 23:41, 8 February 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete: I disagree about the exceptions to sourcing. This BLP article has one source about one book. Sourcing through the "External links" is inappropriate, not reliable, and IMDb is a user-generated site. If someone wants to keep all the apparent original research then "prove it" with BLP acceptable sources. The "Five pillars includes "All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on living persons." Otr500 (talk) 22:16, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Draftify. I am finding other sources on German websites but I can't tell how material they are: NDR.de, Stern.de. I can't find anything that would be a solid RS on English sources.  He seems to have more than one published work (and even his "authority control" is showing up links) which can imply notability.  Untimately we should not have a BLP on WP with effectively no references (the referernce is a link to one of his books); therefore, at minimum, we should draftify. Britishfinance (talk) 19:38, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 03:29, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: I think it needs more source(s) to confirm it in an adequate credit. Ali Ahwazi (talk) 07:59, 20 February 2019 (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.