Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom de Beer


 * 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 Wrong forum. While AfDs can occasionally result in redirects or mergers, this forum is only for proposing deletions. Proposing mergers or redirects happens on the article talk page.  Sandstein  21:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Tom de Beer

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Redirect to Afrikaner Broederbond and merge content. Does not satisfy gng. It is not clear how notability can be justified. 1l2l3k (talk) 13:34, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:46, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:46, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

I first of all, do not know Tom de Beer. I do not belong to the Afrikaner Bond or its predecessor, the Afrikaner Broederbond. I didn’t write the articles on either of the two”bonds”. The Afrikaner Broederbond was written about in the printed media and newspaper quite frequently. The influence it had over the South African Government of the day was well documented and all Presidents and Prime Ministers were members. The organization, although being secretive is definitely notable, maybe even a bit controversial. Being the last leader of the organisation makes it as notable as it leaders were through the years. The leaders were all, politicians, Afrikaners leaders, chancellors and rectors of universities. De beer was chairman of Gencor, one of the biggest mining companies in the world. He was also chairman when the Afrikaner Broederbond changed to the Afrikanerbond and remained chairman of the Afrikanerbond until 2000. This change was at the same time that South Africa became a true democratic country, with the abolishment of Apartheid. De Beer led the organisation to become, not secretive, non-sexist and non-racial. In the context of South Africa, pre and post 1994, the Afrikanerbond and Afrikaner Broederbond played together with its leaders a notable roll in South Africa diverse history and are well documented. Barry Ne (talk) 14:26, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy Close the nominator does not need AfD for the proposed editorial action. Discuss on talk or just be bold. Legacypac (talk) 13:58, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect. This is one of a set of articles created by the same editor, so that each of the past Afrikaner Broederbond leaders have an article about them. However not all leaders are equal - some justify an article about them, some do not. In this case, while the article is well researched most sources are used to verify facts about de Beer, and the only significant coverage towards notability is the mg.co.za article, which is primarily about the organisation. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:03, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Notability
 * Procedural close -- We don't take nominations for redirects at AfD. Just redirect the article and if anyone objects hash it out on the talk page. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 14:57, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * A redirect is basically a deletion. This is not a misuse of the AfD, actually I think this is the best place to have this discussion for notability. --1l2l3k (talk) 15:53, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * A redirect is nothing like a deletion. They have nothing whatsoever in common.  Deletions destroy the edit and version history.  Redirects do not.  Any editor can redirect an article in the course of ordinary editing or can undo a redirect.  Redirecting an article is normal part of BRD. Deletions can only be done by admins and cannot generally be undone.  Really, if you want to redirect the article just go do it.  If there's pushback discuss it on the talk page.  That's how we do redirects. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 17:55, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * At this point I would like this discussion to have an admin decision. Otherwise one day someone will wake up, remove the redirect and reinstate the article. Why not have a decision since we're at it? --1l2l3k (talk) 14:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Admins can't enforce the existence of redirects. It's just not a power they have. Suppose this gets closed by an admin as "redirect" and then some editor goes and redirects the article.  Another editor could undo the redirect right after and start a conversation.  Nothing is gained from this AfD no matter how it closes, which is why it's a waste of everyone's time. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 14:19, 9 November 2018 (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.