Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uhse elite university


 * 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. seems to be lacking sources that discuss the subject so the most policy based argumebnts are the delete ones Spartaz Humbug! 16:45, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Uhse elite university

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No evidence that this "university" is in any way notable. Even tiny universities would typically have more than 165 Ghits. References in article mostly have to do with research, not the research platform itself. OhNo itsJamie Talk 18:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep Delete – the article appears to have been entered largely by its owner, the somewhat self promoting Uwe Kils, a current editor and former administrator on the English Wikipedia, and contributor of compelling images (example shown). So there is a COI here. The article is also badly written, suffering from Kils' poor grasp of English. Nonetheless, the article contains material of unusual interest which should be salvageable in some form. Part of the problem is the unfortunate name of the article. It would be better named something like "Uhse floating laboratory". Kils has been responsible for some remarkably innovative marine research, and has been widely referenced elsewhere in Wikipedia. Most of this research originated with, and was possible because of the nature of this unusual floating laboratory. --Geronimo20 (talk) 22:54, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't believe that the author was ever an admin on English Wikipedia. In fact, Kils is currently blocked for making silly legal threats. OhNo itsJamie Talk 00:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Then read this or item 2 here. --Geronimo20 (talk) 01:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, didn't show up in the user rights log. Either way, those links only serve to demonstrate the questionable judgement of this user. OhNo itsJamie Talk 02:17, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes of course. But his "questionable judgement" and self promotional tendencies as an editor is a separate issue which is not relevant to whether or not this article should be kept. --Geronimo20 (talk) 03:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking more closely, I see that you, Ohnoitsjamie, have been involved in recent conflict with this editor. In addition to nominating this article for deletion, you have also nominated Uwe Kils for deletion. It appears that you are engaged in a punitive campaign of retribution against Uwe Kils. I repeat, no matter how badly he has behaved as an editor, that is not a relevant reason for deleting these pages. Now, not only is Kils behaving badly, but you are behaving badly. I suggest you redeem yourself by withdrawing these nominations. --Geronimo20 (talk) 06:08, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment You consider an unblock decline a conflict? That's the only interaction I've ever had with the user. I noticed the articles when I was investigating the situation. There is no "retribution" here. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 15:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm... while Ohnoitsjamie is compromised and should butt out, I see Kils created yet another article, way back, Antarctic Technology Offshore Lagoon Laboratory. Kils is a pain in the fundamental. He has also, as anyone who can be bothered can easily check, promoted himself all across the web. Still, the earlier article, in my view, remains notable, and should supersede the current incarnation. Consequently, the current article should be deleted, and I have struck through my "Keep" above. --Geronimo20 (talk) 13:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep Seemed almost impossibly spammy. but I reduced it to what seems the important parts. Still needs some expert attention.  I renamed it as suggested above.    DGG ( talk ) 04:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment It looks better, but I'm still not seeing any 3rd party sources to indicate notability, just papers published by Kils. OhNo itsJamie Talk 18:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  -- - Spaceman  Spiff  06:26, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

hallo from uwe```s secretary, dictated over satellite phone, he is sailing: promotion was important in my professions to raise funding (230 billion krouns in 41 countries) but i retired when i turned 35. You can make the uhse elite university down to 5 lines no image or rename it or erase it. the rest we can take on our servers http://www.uhse-elite-university.com http://web.archive.org/web/20001019164813/www.ecoscope.com/fotokils.htm he is sick beeing banned only for asking for correct copyright tags of six of our high resolution photos, kicked out as admin for only erasing part of the highly pornographic page on fisting so we can use it in schools in danmark, germany, norway, and treated like an ememy. good luck! chandra for professor dr. habil. habil. uwe kils
 * comment

Uwe Kils
 * Merge with Antarctic Technology Offshore Lagoon Laboratory. I'm not sure which name to keep the merged article at, but ATOLL seems slightly more covered in independent sources. -Nard 19:11, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

user professor dr. dr. dr. dr. habil. habil. uwe kils Uwe Kils   10:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge that is fine with me. reduce it as much as you like, call it "atoll elite university" the rest we will take on our for pay server in kopenhagen s and dubai s elite universities (there famous scientists are treated with respect). we wanted to add much more for free education, but if some authors (most of which are unknown) don t want it, we don t care, we might stop working with the english wikipedia


 * strong keep

with the eggs and links to ivf images and publication. this is the group who invented ICSI embryos and are still leading. all other fertility clinics have higher mortality rates and crippled embryos

Sylvia klein (talk) 09:25, 2 December 2009 (UTC) — Sylvia klein (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment? Disaster? This actual article was a redirect as of 27 November, so this AfD is moot. Literally. Actually, it was redirected 4 hours after the AfD started. Redirect would be the decision of the AfD, and not just done. How was this not noticed, and what justification does anyone have for unilaterally doing so? Very literally, a decision rendered from this AfD cannot be performed on a different article with a different name. The history of the redirect-only article seems to have been removed, which I really don't understand either. I'll close this myself if no admin bothers to... Also figure this to be a complete disaster of an AfD with the blanketing and/or canvassing, combined with the article being changed without cause. Likely need to go over to RAA unless there are at least some answers. ♪ daTheisen(talk) 04:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment It gets better. Antarctic Technology Offshore Lagoon Laboratory. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 05:22, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Not redirected. Moved. Tim Song (talk) 14:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not persuasive above. Shadowjams (talk) 14:37, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No independent sources mention this. Fences  &amp;  Windows  22:07, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep article needs clean up but has merit. Racepacket (talk) 10:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The article is now Uhse floating laboratory but that name is only found on Wikipedia! Glittering Pillars (talk) 11:14, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, the article is highly promotional. Also I searched by Uhse "Uwe Kils" -wikipedia and got 8 hits on Google, so this article cannot be kept. Glittering Pillars (talk) 11:24, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:NOTE. Lack of significant coverage in independent reliable secondary sources. Also, Vanispamcruftisement. Cirt (talk) 15:35, 5 December 2009 (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.