Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scandinavian connections to Mieszko I

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. If anyone can identify the reliable information that was proposed to be merged (I can't), the text is available on request. Sandstein 10:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Scandinavian connections to Mieszko I

Scandinavian connections to Mieszko I (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Tagged as unverifiable original research, single refs is to a German-language Google cached page, no equivalent page on Polish (or scandinavians) wikis. Seems like OR based on some hard to verify sources from middle ages...  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

A theory about Scandinavian roots of Poland merits a separate article, on a par with the Normanist theory of the origins of Russia and Ukraine but what we have here is an archetypal sample of original research. What we need to do at this point is to merge reliable information into Mieszko I. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 19:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, don't merge, unless we know what exactly is sourced and what isn't. Citing only a single source means that it is likely most of the article is in the latter category. I'm surprised this wasn't killed in the VfD days; it's been around since 2001. Kimchi.sg 20:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep. Notable theory. No anti-normanist hysteria, please.--Arzamas2 07:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. OR, and the strong scent of POV-pushing. WMMartin 17:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Provisional keep Merge, per Ghirla. This information looks reasonably sound and a notable theory (which this may or may not be) deserves its own article, but the sources (well, source) cited so far are completely useless. I'd hate to lose what we've got so far, however... --Arvedui 03:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, Kimchi. Angus McLellan (Talk) 12:56, 1 December 2006 (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.