Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Urs Lüthi


 * 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 as failing WP:N (and various more specific branches of it). No prejudice against recreation should sufficient reliable sources be found which can verify notability. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Urs Lüthi

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Apparently he wrote a well-regarded book about the Berne Trial, a notable event in the history of antisemitism. It's not quite clear from the article, though, whether this is enough to warrant an article per WP:PROF. His date of birth and death appear to be uncertain (indicating that his life hasn't been covered in any detail by anyone), and the assertion of him being a scholarly authority is not substantiated with an inline citation. The name is a common one in Switzerland, so Google yields many hits about unrelated persons. Sandstein (talk) 22:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. This and this suggests that he may be better known as a photographer or artist. --Eastmain (talk) 23:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That's probably another Urs Lüthi. As I said, both the first and the last name are rather common in Switzerland. Sandstein (talk) 06:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong keep of this which is  and no longer . The 1994 imprint by Urs Luthi is the standard work on the Berne Trial of 1934-5. And the latter is the most important source of facts regarding the most infamous anti-Semitic hoax known by its most popular name as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion: Lüthi, Urs (1992). Der Mythos von der Weltverschwörung : die Hetze der Schweizer Frontisten gegen Juden und Freimaurer, am Beispiel des Berner Prozesses um die "Protokolle der Weisen von Zion" (in German). Basel: Helbing & Lichtenhahn. ISBN 3719011976. OCLC 30002662. According, the Notability test has been established. --Ludvikus (talk) 23:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * What is the evidence for Luthi' book being the standard work on the Berne Trial? Has he received a doctoral degree and if yes, when and where? Does he, or has he ever, held any academic positions? Has he written any other published scholarly works and if yes, which ones? Without answers to these basic questions one cannot seriously argue that he satisfies either WP:PROF, WP:BIO or WP:N. Even a convincing WP:N or WP:BK case for his book has not yet been made. I am certainly simpathetic to the goal of having more WP articles on notable topics and people related to the history of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (especially since far too many people still believe their authenticity), but it has to be done in acordance with WP policies and guidelines. Nsk92 (talk) 14:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   —David Eppstein (talk) 04:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Aren't AfD votes by article creators a conflict of interest? ArcAngel (talk) 13:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply. No. This isn't a vote, or a trial, but a discussion about the merits of keeping or deleting an article. All opinions are welcome. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:56, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * keep, possibly redirect if no other significant info found. `'Míkka>t 16:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete unless citations from reliable sources are added to comply with the verifiability policy. Stifle (talk) 20:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:Author, which is specific for authors. some more information and references would help, of course.  DGG (talk) 22:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment, I can not find the guideline WP:AUTHOR, do you perhaps mean WP:PROF? Ashanda (talk) 18:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I am interested in the answer as well since there is no such thing as WP:AUTHOR. More likely that DGG meant WP:BK since he is a regular participant in AfDs regards academics and knows what WP:PROF is quite well. I am still fairly perplexed, though. I don't think one can argue that the subject satisfies WP:PROF. The book about the Berne trial may satisfy WP:BK but in that case one should create an article about the book, not about its author. Nsk92 (talk) 00:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. If this author had really produced the standard work on the subject I would expect to be able to find evidence from Google searches for '"Urs Lüthi" +zion', which should pick up any sources in German, English or most other languages written in the Latin alphabet. In fact a Google Books search gets 4 hits, the book itself and three others which seem to list it in their references; Google Scholar gets 2 hits, which are the same as two of the Google Books hits, but also including the statement "Cited by 2" for Lüthi's book; the Google News archive has absolutely nothing; and a web search gets 36 hits, some of which are not about this Urs Lüthi, and in the ones that are about him I can't see anything that gives the sort of coverage that would confer notability. I know Google isn't everything, but for someone who has supposedly been a leading authority in recent times on such a widely discussed topic I would expect to see a lot more than this. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per Phil Bridger's comments. Apart from a few mentions of his book, there does not seem to be any references anywhere about this person. Certainly not enough to pass either WP:PROF or WP:BIO. At best, and with a pretty long stretch, this is a BLP1E case. If enough info about the notability of his book is found, then we should have an article about the book rather than the person. Nsk92 (talk) 00:45, 3 May 2008 (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.