Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Germany: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 14: Line 14:
== Germany ==
== Germany ==
<!-- New AFD discussions should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
<!-- New AFD discussions should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obersturmmann}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Friedrich_Gottfried}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Friedrich_Gottfried}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Franz_Ketterer}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Franz_Ketterer}}

Revision as of 17:54, 9 July 2024

Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Germany. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Germany|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Germany. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Europe.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch
Scan for Germany related AfDs


Germany

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. ✗plicit 00:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obersturmmann

Obersturmmann (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Procedural nom; a malformed PROD with rationale This does not seem important enough to warrant its own page. Indeed, on the German language wiki, this information is merely included on the SA page. was removed. I don't see sufficient sourcing, but would not be surprised if sourcing exists. Walsh90210 (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Germany. Walsh90210 (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Plenty of sourcing, as with all such ranks, all of which have articles. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I have no idea what the "plenty of sourcing" Necrothesp is referring to. Almost nothing comes up for this word at all on google scholar, and the hits are to sources that appear to be lists of one kind or another (example), or from very dodgy sources. (For an example, here's the description of one of the books that comes up: "We had to do it. We had to reprint this book. Rarely has a book had such an impact on so many of us here at Ignatius Press. It is one of the most powerful and moving books we have come across. If you can only buy one book this season, this must be the one." This doesn't scream "strong editorial oversight" to me.) We don't mention it on Sturmabteilung either, so it's not a good redirect destination. If anyone does find this plenty of sourcing, please do let me know. -- asilvering (talk) 03:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Friedrich Gottfried

Friedrich Gottfried (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another short compound given name article from the banned Neelix. Friedrich Bernhard Gottfried Nicolai obviously doesn't qualify, and there's no indication that Friedrich Gottfried Abel does either. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.
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 keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 18:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Franz Ketterer

Franz Ketterer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about an obscure subject that does not seem to be notable outside of some (likely incorrect) mentions that he invented the cuckoo clock. I cannot find sufficient sourcing to improve the article. Mbdfar (talk) 17:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 18:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete: Most sources online are clock stores and blogs which are not reliable. There are quite a few hits on Google books that claim he did indeed invent the cuckoo clock, some written in in the 1800s, so I do not entirely believe it is a myth that has just propagated around the internet. The article is obviously WP:OR and WP:SYNTH; it would have to be rewritten and appropriately sourced. I believe the subject probably is notable if he did invent the cuckoo clock, I just don't think there's enough coverage to write an article claiming he did without WP:OR. With the coverage that I have found, the article would amount to nothing more than a short stub stating something like "Franz Ketterer was a German clockmaker who may have invented the cuckoo clock." If someone does look through Google books or elsewhere and finds even a bit more in-depth coverage, I will change my vote to keep. C F A 💬 02:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep Thanks to Cielquiparle for improving the article.
  • Keep and keep improving. Article was in dismal shape so have performed WP:TNT and rewritten with citations. Meets WP:GNG although the article is more about the historiography rather than a biography per se (not uncommon, the further back in history you go). While not every history mystery is worthy of a Wikipedia article, this one is because the village of Schönwald and other entities continue to promote the Franz Ketterer story. Good article to have flagged for cleanup, now we can keep improving. Cielquiparle (talk) 08:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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 merge‎ to Turks in Germany. Liz Read! Talk! 00:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almancı

Almancı (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Possible Wiki dictionary item, the term itself is brief enough to be merged with Turks in Germany. Ecrusized (talk) 00:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

2014 Schalke 04 Cup

2014 Schalke 04 Cup (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As a friendly tournament, the matches were of no consequence. Thus, 10 years later, we can clearly see that the tournament was not noteworthy, wasn't important in the world of football and got a corresponding lack of coverage (apart from reports of the matches). The level of detailed coverage on display (goalscorers, match kick-off times, table) is therefore not needed, with the entry failing WP:NOTINHERITED (notability not being inherited from the participating teams), WP:MILL, WP:SUSTAINED and WP:NOTSTATS among others. Geschichte (talk) 20:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Opinion is divided here. Looking for more participation to determine consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Discarding !votes not based on guidelines, we're left with a clear consensus to delete. Owen× ☎ 12:27, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karl Anselm, Duke of Urach

Karl Anselm, Duke of Urach (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The notability of the subject of this article has been in question since 2010. The Lithuanian throne he is the third pretender to only existed for 8 months and was gone long before he was born. D1551D3N7 (talk) 17:27, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 19:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep according to the reference from the arcticle he owns a huge junk of land (3598 acres), [1] the Greshornish Forestry estate.Axisstroke (talk) 07:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think land ownership is grounds for notability. I clicked around on the site of that reference and the first one i opened was https://web.archive.org/web/20090106212545/http://www.whoownsscotland.org.uk/page_cache/ar/glenbyre.htm someone who owns a similar sized plot who is not notable because they own it. Another similarly sized plot: https://web.archive.org/web/20081204210115/http://www.whoownsscotland.org.uk/page_cache/ar/turnalt.htm D1551D3N7 (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on the size of the land ownership, in this case > 1000 ha, that is a considerable piece of land and hence it is notable. Moreover if it is a notable estate it is notable. Axisstroke (talk) 09:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does it depend on the size of the land ownership though? Do any policies exist that say land ownership is grounds for notability? If it were notable then it would be talked about in reliable sources and not just in a land ownership registry. This land in particular is a forest in a remote part of Scotland. The estate isn't notable, I can't find any sources that say much about it. There's this site that talks about a forest walk between Greshornish and Waternish https://www.visit-waternish.co.uk/greshornish-to-waternish-forests-walk/ and there is Greshornish House which is a hotel but I don't find these very compelling for the argument that the estate itself is notable and that by extension Karl would be. D1551D3N7 (talk) 16:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.whoownsscotland.org.uk/page_cache/in/greshornish_forestry.htm
Owning land - large tracts or not - is not in itself notable. If the area of land (or parts thereof) happens to be notable then owning it still does not confer notability on the owner (WP:NOTINHERITED). ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 05:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ownership passes WP:NRV and WP:GNG. The owner has full rights of his land unless of course in communism. Axisstroke (talk) 06:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The policies you mention are about notability of article subjects. If you mean that ownership contributes to notability, you are mistaken, there is no such Wikipedia rule. - Altenmann >talk 18:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 20:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. 66.99.15.163 (talk) 15:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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 keep‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Karl of Hesse

Prince Karl of Hesse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Sources include passing mentions in a couple of books about other people and a self-published fansite. DrKay (talk) 14:36, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 17:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete The only item that get somehow significant coverage was his marriage. Therefore this is a case for WP:ONEEVENT and this only got attention because of the attending guests, not the couple itself. So, no notability. -- Theoreticalmawi (talk) 15:05, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The several book notices of the subject pass WP:Basic. Axisstroke (talk) 20:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I wonder how you come to "serveral" book notices? 2 of the 4 books (with one listed double) are simple name directories, one is covering his father (with one trivial mention, that his father choosed the name "Adolf" for him to honor Adolf Hitler). I was not able to get access to the fourth book but given the sourced information and the title of the book, his coverage there is not substantial either. So, there is at maximum one book, which is very clearly about a differnt person. How can this add up to "significant coverage"? --Theoreticalmawi (talk) 08:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Meets at least WP:Basic. The fact that the wedding was attended by notable people is an indication of societal notability which also attracted media attention. And being cited in multiple books is an indication of notability even if he is not the subject of those books. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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 redirect‎ to Golden Bear of Zagreb#Women's singles 2. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea Diewald

Andrea Diewald (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable figure skater; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Golden Bear of Zagreb#Women's singles 2 as that was her best result. Doesn't meet WP:NSKATE. I only found 2 RS and that doesn't seem to be enough to pass WP:SIGCOV: [1] [2] Tau Corvi (talk) 03:29, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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 redirect‎ to German Figure Skating Championships#Men. Liz Read! Talk! 23:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Hopfes

Michael Hopfes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable figure skater; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:20, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligiblle for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to German Figure Skating Championships#Men. Per WP:NSKATE figure skater has to win their country's senior national championships. Hopfes' best result in the German Championships was 2nd place. WP:SIGCOV also not met. Tau Corvi (talk) 12:56, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Others

Categories

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Templates

See also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Germany&oldid=1233552616"