Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Westdeutsche in der DDR und Nach-DDR

Author posted a POV rant in German. vandalised something else. I thought it should be run through this and killed very fast, but wanted to explain why; so I vote for a delete. Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 17:39, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I suspect this was inappropriately handled. POV is not usually enough reason for speedy deletion and the issue of having vandalized something else is not relevant. Material submitted in foreign languages should normally be handled according to the processes laid out at Pages needing translation into English. There are a number of us quite active there. -- Jmabel 19:33, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)


 * I agree this may be wasn't the correct way of deletion, but in any case, I vote for delete it - it is by the way the same contributor who created the original POV version of Myths about East Germany. And the translation the anonymous poster did take care of himself by using babelfish... And if I am not mistaken the same text was quickly deleted on the german wikipedia earlier, that's why the poster tried his luck here. andy 19:38, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * It's back as Westgermans in East germany. I've posted it for speedy delete. - Lucky 6.9 00:55, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * From Pages needing translation into English:
 * Westdeutsche in der DDR und Nach-DDR - I thought German, but it may be Dutch Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 16:44, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * It is German, but it's highly POV pro-East-Germany. And IIRC just a day ago the same page was deleted as being non-encyclopedic at the German wikipedia. andy 17:06, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * And now we have the english version as well - Westgermans in East-Germany - the standard babelfish autotranslate. Obviously the same who created the original Myths about East Germany earlier.
 * I changed the german version into a redirect, and look forward to see the babelfish version on VfD soon... andy 17:12, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * While I think this was very POV, and I have no particular problem with its ultimate deletion, I feel this has been handled terribly. This was substantive enough not to deserve speedy delete, even if it was rather POV. There was material that might deserve moving. Also, someone replaced it with a machine translation, which is a definite no-no. There is supposed to be two weeks allowed for translation. The fact that someone finds the material POV, or doesn't like material being initially placed here in a foreign language should not change the usual processes. Even a Vfd decision in a different-language Wikipedia should only be afvisory. -- Jmabel 19:12, Jun 27, 2004 (UTC)