Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schindlerjuden

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 keep. Withdrawn. Yes, AfD is not cleanup, but removing almost the entire contents of a 4-year-old article per WP:NOT (with the possibility of redirecting it) seemed like a reasonable thing to discuss on this board. However, this discussion is clearly going nowhere. (non-admin closure) power~enwiki (π, ν) 16:02, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Schindlerjuden

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It gives me no pleasure to XfD this. I feel the term must be maintained as a redirect (possibly to Oskar Schindler, but there are other possible targets), but am unwilling to BOLD-ly do so without a discussion.

The page as it currently stands is not encyclopedic content. The raw list of names would be appropriate for Wikisource but not this project, and the list of translations from German of occupations shouldn't be included in that form. power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:09, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:32, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable subject. Whether to include the listof names and professions is an editing issue. FloridaArmy (talk) 08:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Clearly notable topic. The Schindler list Jews are discussed as a group, have acted together as a group (helping Schindler for instance after the war), and have received SIGCOV. Deletion is not clean up - and the some 1200 people are distinct from Schindler himself.Icewhiz (talk) 10:18, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Topic is notable, but not the list of names, which should go to WikiSource instead. Acnetj (talk) 10:44, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep per WP:BIO and Icewhiz. Page needs expansion, not deletion. Yoninah (talk) 11:08, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, this was a stupid nomination. I vote a strong keep for this well-known subject, and vote to give a trout to the nominator. Debresser (talk) 12:38, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
keep, clearly notable, problems can be fixed without deletion if necessary. Talk:Schindlerjuden is the right place to discuss this. —Kusma (t·c) 13:47, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep - Suggest that the nom withdraw this nomination. The article needs improvements, but notability is not questioned.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:09, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I may revisit this article. I would like to develop an article that reflects on this group's life during and after the war. A list does not give this topic its due.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:41, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.