Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Romano-German culture

Since closure of this AfD it has been established that Sir Kindle is a sockpuppet of ProfMozart. Hesperian 02:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 no consensus. The discussion indicates that the title corresponds to a valid subject, so POV problems and sourcing issues can be solved through normal editorial processes. --Akhilleus (talk) 15:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Romano-German culture

This is a fourth attempt by the same author to create an article that advances a dubious, poorly sourced, and confusingly expressed theory about the nature of the Holy Roman Empire. Its assertions of fact contradict existing articles, which the author has not attempted to contribute to. Other editors have tried to improve the article, but there seems to be no more room for improvement. See Talk:Romano-German culture and User talk:ProfMozart. Rob C (Alarob) 15:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The phrase Romano-German appears to be widely used (e.g.: "The legal systems of Europe originated in the impact on the vital Romano-German societies in the early Middle Ages..." [1]). This may or may not be a good article, but the subject seems worthy of an article separate from H.R.E. JJL 17:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete But that's not what it's about; this is a POV fork of the initial paragraphs of Holy Roman Empire. It doesn't even mention Theodoric or the Merovingians. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment concur about the content, but the article title represents something that should be here, so I'm hoping the POV battles can be ironed out. JJL 18:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - If we delete this, we can reuse the title. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Or, just edit what's there? JJL 18:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Unlikely to succeed with a revertwarrior who wants this to be a tendentious article about something else. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I would suggest that the existing article Germania is a good place for ~~the content~~ info on "Romano-German culture", by analogy with Gaul and Roman Britain. -- Rob C (Alarob) 18:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment: Looking at ghits for Romano-German, a redirect would certainly be called for in that case, but I see a distinction to be drawn here between Germania and Romano-Germany. However, I am not expert in this area. I stick with my Keep. JJL 18:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - No, Germania is too early, and too far north, for Theodoric; and much too early for the content here on Charlemagne (which is in any case redundant). Septentrionalis

PMAnderson 18:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Definitely a POV article. The author has been given several chances to improve the article and has failed to do this or provide any reason for this article being notable. As mentioned this article conflicts with others and the article is generally written poorly by Wikipedia standards. Maybe some of the content can be merged into a relevant article but for now the article needs to be deleted and hopefully for the final time. Xtreme racer 20:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by nom:
- I'm not an expert, but do notice that many Ghits on "Romano-German" are to Romanian pages, where "Romano-German" means "Romanian-German," while some are to Italian pages, where both "Romano" and "German" can be proper names.
- Looking in German Wikipedia, I find that matches describe "römisch-germanisch" conflict rather than a merging of cultures.
- In fact, the article on Germanen in German Wikipedia contradicts the major thesis of our Romano-German culture, stating that the Germanic peoples "preserved their distinctiveness, notwithstanding the intensive exchange between Germans and Romans." (Sie bewahrten ihre Eigenständigkeit, obwohl es auch zwischen Römern und Germanen einen intensiven Austausch gab.)
- Please note as well that other English Wikipedia articles (e.g. Irene (empress), Translatio imperii, King of the Romans, etc.) contradict assertions made in this one. -- Rob C (Alarob) 22:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. More or less OR. The term Romano-German does exist, but a Romano-German culture as described in this article? No. All relevant content can be found in many other articles, such as Holy Roman Empire or Germania. JdeJ 04:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep there is no article on this subject in wikipedia. Its ludacris to not have it. I am the author of this article, and i will be the first to admit my english, and grammer are not up to par. But either the the article/subject does deserve a place in wikipedia.--ProfMozart 05:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Part of the problem is that the article is simply your own ideas and that the factual accuracy is low. You come up with things like And like all the other countries that were once under Roman rule, they used the Roman alphabet . That's nonsense, the countries that were once under Rome have used over ten different alphabets when/after under Rome. So unfortunately, the spelling and grammar in the article is not the problem, the accuracy of the whole article is dubious at best. JdeJ 13:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletions. -- ⇒ bsnowball 10:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletions. -- ⇒ bsnowball 10:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - this is a shallow article most of whose content is covered in Germania and Holy Romasn Empire. If the article has anything worthwhile that is in neither then it should be merged. But that applies to very little of it. Most of it should be deleted. I assume that Romano-German is the equivalent of Romano-British, which refers to Britain in the period when it (or rather most of it) was part of the Roman empire. If so, any thing Romano-German will be covered in the Germania article and subarticles on its constituent provinces. Peterkingiron 23:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - But the article should be at least rewriten. No offense to anyone, but its as if a 9 year old wrote it. Secondly most of the article comes from other wikipedia articles, it looks like paragraphs were just cut from Germania and Holy Roman Empire, and pasted in Romano-German culture. Although the subject is notable and does belong on wiki, the article itself needs vast improvement. --Sir Kindle 07:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment Sir Kindle the article was written by an editor who wasn't exactly the most fluent in English which explains why it is written badly and you are probably correct as it does seem that parts were just cut out of other articles but for now unless someone can figure out how to rewrite this properly we need to delete this article and then in the future rebuild this article but right now it just isn't in a state to be left on Wikipedia. Xtreme racer 23:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Well that explains the way the article sounds, I'm sure I could rewrite this article, and have it up to standard in a few days. I have a pretty good understanding of the subject, in college we studied something that resembled this subject. I would need a few days to do some research, but I dont see a problem. How much longer is the current article going to be posted? --Sir Kindle 23:49, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment AFD debates last 5 days and since the article was nominated on June 18 the article will still be here till at least the 23rd of June and maybe longer depending on how the debate goes. I know it may not seem like much time but if you really do have a good understanding I can't see why you wouldn't be able to get the article up to standard. But as mentioned a lot of facts either need to be verified or removed if they were the personal opinion of the original author of the article. Xtreme racer 00:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Kindle, if you're serious about working on the article, you might have a look at Gallo-Roman culture for guidance. A good factual article. As you're a brand-new editor, let us know if we can answer questions about how things work. -- Rob C (Alarob) 01:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Ya know, I may have spoken too soon. The thing is I'm not too familiar with editing articles, and I wouldnt want my first wiki article to be anything less then suitable. I do however have some resources that might help. I have some books, and refrences that touch the subject, and I have done an extensive google search on it. I just wouldnt be able to make an article out of it, not quite yet anyways, not in 3 days. Its not that simple of a subject, and not so black and white, as if I was writing an article on something more tangable, say the moon for instance (no disrespect to the editor) :). I looked at Gallo-Romano, and as far as im concerned, its very close to the subject at hand,(since Franks are Germans per se) and I wonder if why the author didnt "cut and paste" from that article as well. --Sir Kindle 05:53, 21 June 2007 (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.