Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-German (ideology)

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 of the debate was keep and cleanup. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-German (ideology)

Delete. This article has serious problems with POV, notability and verifiability. --metzerly 06:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom Dspserpico 06:46, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep- It is definitely POV, but that can be fixed. I'm not quite sold on notability, but it is definitely verifiable (there's a good selection of links at the bottom). The El Reyko 07:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Many of the links are broken, irrelevant, in English/non-German, etc. The link to the German government report is about extremist groups and says nothing about anti-Germans. This article is much ado about nothing. --metzerly 07:57, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

• The Volker Radke link, "cutupgermany" and "antideutschprojekt" prove that there is such a thing as an anti-german ideology. But, as I say, I am not quite sold on the notability of the concept. The El Reyko 10:23, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. This article started its en:Wikilife on March 15, 2004, as a translation of the corresponding article on the German Wikipedia. Since then the two articles have evolved independently. The present German version also has its problems, which seem to be about NPOV issues. Verifiability does not appear to be an issue, based on the discussion and the external links. What is clear from the German text, but not from the English version, is that "Anti-German" is a self-chosen and self-applied label. The original creator (and translator?) of the article here, User:Leo Bauer, is a professed Anti-German. Lambiam^Talk 11:36, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup This is definitely POV, but it should have a place on WP, although it needs major Cleanup. Jonathan235 15:30, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - Has POV issues but authors have made efforts to provide verifible sources and seems to be a subject of encyclopedic value. Needs a lot of work but is worth keeping.--Cini 15:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Needs work, but is notable subject. Tfine80 15:36, 23 April 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.