- 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. Mackensen (talk) 16:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Heimat ist das, was gesprochen wird
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Heimat ist das, was gesprochen wird ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
One line, none notable book. Suggest redirecting to Herta Müller. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 14:00, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 14:00, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 14:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 14:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Satisfies criteria 5 of the guideline
WP:NBOOK. The author won a nobel prize for literature. You can't use an essay to reject a guideline, especially when the essay is garbage.
James500 (
talk)
18:04, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- You can easily merge it to the author's page. There's no references used in the article. Plus, there's no indication she won it on /that/ book. Plus the page is just a stub and tells nothing of the book. -- Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 18:04, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Redirect to the author's article. These micro bot-stubs do not serve a purpose. -- » Shadowowl | talk 12:39, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- Procedural keep, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Im Haarknoten wohnt eine Dame (3rd nomination). Coolabahapple ( talk) 05:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 09:25, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Archive 71#"AFD is not for redirecting"?, there is a consensus that redirecting may be discussed at AfD. It seems worthwhile to have some further discussion of whether this book is independently notable, or whether it should be redirected to the article on its (very notable) author. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Este sau nu este Ion (3rd nomination) & Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Im Haarknoten wohnt eine Dame (3rd nomination).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe ( talk) 15:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Relisting comment: Per Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Archive 71#"AFD is not for redirecting"?, there is a consensus that redirecting may be discussed at AfD. It seems worthwhile to have some further discussion of whether this book is independently notable, or whether it should be redirected to the article on its (very notable) author. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Este sau nu este Ion (3rd nomination) & Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Im Haarknoten wohnt eine Dame (3rd nomination).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe ( talk) 15:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Authors do not win a Nobel for a particular book, but for their overall work. (It's not like the Pulitzer). Any full-scale book by a author of such great importance is in my opinion almost certainly notable, and the article should be sourced by those who can work in the appropriate language. I strongly favor redirecting and combining for minor authors. DGG ( talk ) 16:02, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Sourced and expanded. AFD is not for suggesting redirects, neither is it a venue for discussion of subjects that have already been kept by clear consensus in a previous discussion. Sam Sailor 05:17, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Umm the closing remark of the discussion is "There is a ☑ clear numerical and policy-weighed(For one, the arguments about utilizing RFD is flat-out improper.)consensus that AfD is a right venue to seek for redirect(s), which have been challenged.The first attempt at redirection ought be directly attempted per our principles of being bold." So yes AFD is the place to suggest redirects that has been challenged. And in this case it was challenged since was said the article should be kept as is because of notability. --
Tyw7 (
🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (
ping me)
20:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- No, you get it wrong, the article has never been redirected, consequently there has never been a revert of the redirect (a challenge). The sentence
"And in this case it was challenged since was said the article should be kept as is because of notability."
makes no sense. Sam Sailor 16:15, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- No, you get it wrong, the article has never been redirected, consequently there has never been a revert of the redirect (a challenge). The sentence
- Umm the closing remark of the discussion is "There is a ☑ clear numerical and policy-weighed(For one, the arguments about utilizing RFD is flat-out improper.)consensus that AfD is a right venue to seek for redirect(s), which have been challenged.The first attempt at redirection ought be directly attempted per our principles of being bold." So yes AFD is the place to suggest redirects that has been challenged. And in this case it was challenged since was said the article should be kept as is because of notability. --
Tyw7 (
🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (
ping me)
20:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NBOOK criteria 1 and 5. Also received mid-importance by our very own WikiProject Novels. gidonb ( talk) 19:17, 4 August 2018 (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.
- 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. Mackensen (talk) 16:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Heimat ist das, was gesprochen wird
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Heimat ist das, was gesprochen wird ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
One line, none notable book. Suggest redirecting to Herta Müller. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 14:00, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 14:00, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 14:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 14:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Satisfies criteria 5 of the guideline
WP:NBOOK. The author won a nobel prize for literature. You can't use an essay to reject a guideline, especially when the essay is garbage.
James500 (
talk)
18:04, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- You can easily merge it to the author's page. There's no references used in the article. Plus, there's no indication she won it on /that/ book. Plus the page is just a stub and tells nothing of the book. -- Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 18:04, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Redirect to the author's article. These micro bot-stubs do not serve a purpose. -- » Shadowowl | talk 12:39, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- Procedural keep, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Im Haarknoten wohnt eine Dame (3rd nomination). Coolabahapple ( talk) 05:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 09:25, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Archive 71#"AFD is not for redirecting"?, there is a consensus that redirecting may be discussed at AfD. It seems worthwhile to have some further discussion of whether this book is independently notable, or whether it should be redirected to the article on its (very notable) author. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Este sau nu este Ion (3rd nomination) & Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Im Haarknoten wohnt eine Dame (3rd nomination).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe ( talk) 15:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Relisting comment: Per Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Archive 71#"AFD is not for redirecting"?, there is a consensus that redirecting may be discussed at AfD. It seems worthwhile to have some further discussion of whether this book is independently notable, or whether it should be redirected to the article on its (very notable) author. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Este sau nu este Ion (3rd nomination) & Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Im Haarknoten wohnt eine Dame (3rd nomination).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe ( talk) 15:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Authors do not win a Nobel for a particular book, but for their overall work. (It's not like the Pulitzer). Any full-scale book by a author of such great importance is in my opinion almost certainly notable, and the article should be sourced by those who can work in the appropriate language. I strongly favor redirecting and combining for minor authors. DGG ( talk ) 16:02, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Sourced and expanded. AFD is not for suggesting redirects, neither is it a venue for discussion of subjects that have already been kept by clear consensus in a previous discussion. Sam Sailor 05:17, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Umm the closing remark of the discussion is "There is a ☑ clear numerical and policy-weighed(For one, the arguments about utilizing RFD is flat-out improper.)consensus that AfD is a right venue to seek for redirect(s), which have been challenged.The first attempt at redirection ought be directly attempted per our principles of being bold." So yes AFD is the place to suggest redirects that has been challenged. And in this case it was challenged since was said the article should be kept as is because of notability. --
Tyw7 (
🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (
ping me)
20:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- No, you get it wrong, the article has never been redirected, consequently there has never been a revert of the redirect (a challenge). The sentence
"And in this case it was challenged since was said the article should be kept as is because of notability."
makes no sense. Sam Sailor 16:15, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- No, you get it wrong, the article has never been redirected, consequently there has never been a revert of the redirect (a challenge). The sentence
- Umm the closing remark of the discussion is "There is a ☑ clear numerical and policy-weighed(For one, the arguments about utilizing RFD is flat-out improper.)consensus that AfD is a right venue to seek for redirect(s), which have been challenged.The first attempt at redirection ought be directly attempted per our principles of being bold." So yes AFD is the place to suggest redirects that has been challenged. And in this case it was challenged since was said the article should be kept as is because of notability. --
Tyw7 (
🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (
ping me)
20:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NBOOK criteria 1 and 5. Also received mid-importance by our very own WikiProject Novels. gidonb ( talk) 19:17, 4 August 2018 (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.