Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nazi Literature
Nazi Literature was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was to keep the article.
Clearly, it's a personal essay. Original research, whatever you want to call it. - Vague Rant 09:06, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
- Why would personal original research disqualify it? The topic may unsettle some, but on first glance it appears to be well-written serious historical research. I am not competent to review the quality, but I suggest keeping it unless it is rotten with errors that can't readily be corrected. -- a reader.
- For why orginal reseach disqualifies articles, see No original research Kappa 13:02, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- personal essay?? original research??? whatever??? answer it, dispute it, don't whine about it.
- OK 24.207.72.43, thank you for contributing the essay or research. Since you are the editor who created the page, please give us some background as to the origin of this material.
- Cleanup and move. "Nazi literature" would be the appropriate title. And once the article is cleaned up, it would merit an link at German literature. Samaritan 09:50, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Cleanup and move. Yes it's an essay, but I don't think it counts as original research which is not acceptable apparently. Kappa 13:02, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete: Original research. It's well and good to suggest that someone write a section of literature under the Nazis in the German literature article, but there's no way to clean up this article and nothing to merge, as it's very short on secondary material. Geogre 16:20, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Unless someone is willing to clean this up including creating an article from it that is not original research, delete. —siroχo 18:14, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
Neutral for now:On a quick read, I don't see the sense in which it is at all obviously "original research" in an objectionable sense. It is a bit POV, but that can be fixed. It does need citations, especially for quotations. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:51, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)- Move (retitle), cleanup, and keep. The text appears exclusively to concern children's literature, and as such would seem to be better at Children's literature in Nazi Germany or some such. Just because the author has researched a fairly obscure topic doesn't make "original research" if the topic itself is potentially encyclopedic. Articles remain to be written on literature by members of the Nazi Party, and about writers who expressed sympathy with Fascism or Nazism. Smerdis of Tlön 21:34, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Move to Nazi literature. I don't think this is entirely original research, and the topic is certainly valid. Needs considerable revision, though. — Gwalla | Talk 23:21, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Keep and cleanup. Compliments the German literature article. -Sean Curtin 01:26, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
- After purging out the POV and unverified statements, I'm not confident that enough will be left to preserve. I'm willing to be proven wrong, though, as long as someone makes a credible start during the VfD discussion period. (Note: If kept, Gwalla's right that we have to fix the capitalization.) Rossami (talk) 06:26, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Keep and cleanup. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 01:31, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Original research means there is no way to verify factual information, which is not true in this case. Keep and cleanup. --L33tminion | (talk) 02:12, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)
- KEEP AND FACTCHECK Pedant 06:35, 2004 Nov 19 (UTC)
- Keep and move to Nazi literature. [[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 17:47, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Keep - Trollminator 21:40, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.