Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lotti and Rosemarie Knaak

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 Speedy delete as copyright violation. --Haemo 04:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lotti and Rosemarie Knaak

Lotti and Rosemarie Knaak (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Possible WP:V and/or notability problems. Every Google result for these twins seems to reference this article. Hyperbole 01:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment Well, this webpage seems to be a reliable source on this subject. However, it must also be noted that a quick google search shows up very few links to this subject. --Siva1979Talk to me 02:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment That page really appears to be a Wikipedia mirror to me. Even if it isn't, does the community feel that conjoined twins are inherently notable, simply because of their rarity? Because I can't find any evidence that these two generated exceptional media interest - and considering that at least one of them died as a small child, she couldn't have had any major accomplishments. --Hyperbole 02:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete. CSD/G12: Copyvio. Google searchification turned up this page which is significantly similar to the original version of the page. The current version differs by some very minor changes and omission of the second and subsequent paragraphs. --slakr 02:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I wouldn't be surprised if that Tripod page cut-and-pasted from Wikipedia, not the other way around. --Hyperbole 02:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • A reasonable assumption, but the article here was created 11 Feb 07 while the other website claims to have been updated on 10.8.06, so WP:COPYVIO is still in play. —Travistalk 02:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Good point. Archive.org[1] confirms that the page existed in 2006. --Hyperbole 02:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete - Per copyright violations. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:54, 22 August 2007 (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.