Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Auschwitz sweatshirt controversy

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 redirect to Robert Keith Packer#Camp Auschwitz sweatshirt controversy. Closing early per WP:SNOW. There is near-unanimous consensus that this should not be a standalone article. Opinion is divided about whether any content should be merged or not (and to which article), but a redirect allows editors to find consensus about this through the editorial process. I'm for now redirecting to Packer's article because it already contains extensive content about this topic, unlike the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol article. It's now also a matter for Packer's ongoing AfD to determine whether and where to cover this topic further. Sandstein 09:07, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Auschwitz sweatshirt controversy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This single aspect of the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol fails WP:NOTNEWS. It was but one aspect of a crazy event, and is not sufficiently its own story. There were also shirts that read "6MWE" (six million wasn't enough). No WP:LASTING impact of this one particular example of anti-semitism. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As the creator of this article (who created it before realising Packer's article existed), I'll just say that most of the content here is mentioned in his article. I was personally was hoping that the merge would be the other way around, but that seems unlikely now. I do agree that merging the content in Packer's article to the main one would make the main article even lengthy and unreadable though. --Bangalamania (talk) 21:53, 17 January 2021 (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.