Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Socialism: A Left Wing Movement


 * 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. Carlossuarez46 19:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

National Socialism: A Left Wing Movement

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The article, being a reproduction of an essay, fails WP:OR. Mendors 00:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

this article is curiously similar to prose by Lyndon LaRouche, and, I suspect a large number of people. It would be an good addittion to an article on this style of political discourse, which makes sweeping generalizations about things over a long span of history Cinnamon colbert 00:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Original Research? Hardly. It's a quote. As such, it is very unoriginal. --DaleEastman 01:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia is not a repository for public domain material. the_undertow talk  02:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikisource, then delete. Wikisource is the repository of public domain material mentioned above. —C.Fred (talk) 02:15, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Misinformed or malicious political essay. It wasn't the socialist part of national socialism that was bad. It was the exploitation of nationalism that led people to not question their leadership. (You're either with us or against us - sound familiar?) ~ Infrangible 02:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep As specious as the above arguments for censorship may be, it is important to remember censorship was a primary component of Fascism, Communism and Socialism.  The above arguments even bolster Knudsen's case that Fascism is a form of Leftism rather than refute it.   --68.212.6.230 03:08, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to wikisouce as mentioned above - the place for public domain stuff Corpx 03:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Question: How do we know this is public domain besides the claim on the article page? The linked page says "Copyright © 1999 - 2007  All rights reserved. [Gnostic Liberation Front].  ".  Corvus cornix 04:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The footnote on the webpage is incorrect - this essay is not property of the website. However, I have seen no proof that the author ever released this into the public domain. the_undertow talk  05:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Only the first three sentences belong in Wikipedia. This is not the place to reproduce essays in their entirety; the copyright status is actually irrelevant. The article on the author Povl Riis-Knudsen covers the essay, including a quote, so this article is superfluous. Emeraude 12:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the copy/paste section, the rest I remain neutral.--JForget 17:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete This fails policy in so many ways: for starters there 's no assertion of notability, this is obvious soapboxing, it's a huge chunk of  "primary source" with only the tiniest figleaf of explanation at the top, there's a possible copyvio etc. etc. This is blogfodder pure and simple and has no place in an encyclopaedia. Nej tak! --Folantin 17:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * More on notability: this Povl Riis-Knudsen character gets precisely 241 Google hits, so I doubt whether we should be hosting his "literary works". His Wiki bio is hardly based on objective, reliable sources either. I suggest it's another one for the chop. --Folantin 17:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per above. Soapboxing/OR by an embarrassment to our country. MartinDK 18:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete OR, intrinsically POV, copyvio, impossible to maintain. We might have a record here. Rama 20:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete Soapboxing POV for National socialism.   Acroterion  (talk)  02:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Outrageous soapboxing+non notable author. @ MartinDK: morons are born everywhere. Besides this twit and Drama Queen, your great country has mighty little to be ashamed of ;-) --Targeman 03:15, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. It's snowing on Hitler's grave right now. Bearian 21:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, might belong on Wikisource or not, but that's another debate. NawlinWiki 21:36, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Just reprinting somebody's words is not Wikipedia is about. Covered adequately in Povl Riis-Knudsen article. Keresaspa 15:24, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, no assertion of notability. Everyking 15:44, 25 July 2007 (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.