Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danish Nazism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Danish Nazism
- View log) – (
Unsourced extremely POV article that is wholly unsuitable in both tone and content. The title in inherently POV and even a redirect is probably unacceptable. I'm not sure what point the author is trying to make but I vaguely recall the suggestion that we were not a soapbox. If there is an article here I strongly suggest that we get rid of this one and start again with a proper title. Disclosure - I'm currently in Denmark but I'm not Danish. Oh, and the author removed a speedy tag which is why we are here. Spartaz Humbug! 21:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete unless major cleanup done -- this reads like a (translated?) junior high school paper. --Dhartung | Talk 22:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Spartaz has said it all in the nomination - an unsourced, unreferenced schoolboy essay. (aeropagitica) 23:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and (aeropagitica)—though perhaps it should be "schoolgirl essay", given the article creator's username. Deor 00:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- '"Edit'" Evidence in 1964 suggests secret relations between goverments, although this was not paid much attention to. The writing is simply atrocious though. -New History, April 2007
- Save Testimony: My great grandfther was taken way and put into a "concentration camp". He reluctantly tells me that the Danish police arrived and took him away from his home at 23:00. Grandfather was then taken to one of the camps, which were actually similar to harsh barracks. I would not like to share what happened next, as it would be disrespectful to my great grandfather. I also feel uncomfortable recounting it. -anonymous 2007
- Save I The following link supports my wiki page: http://www.dk-christmasseals.heindorffhus.dk/frame-DenmarkNazi.htm . Alexandra55, April 5, 2007
- Comment Can I ask whether you found time to read the link to the guidelines on reliable sourcing that I left on your talk page? That link doesn't appear to fit that guideline and a subject like this really needs a number of independant scholorlu sources to justify the contents. Spartaz Humbug! 23:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Maybe you need to be more scholarly and spell the very word itself right Alexandra 55, April 6, 2007
- Delete and let a better supported article be written.DGG 05:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Baristarim 23:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete no salvageable content Alex Bakharev 00:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)