Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Auschwitz sweatshirt controversy

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]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(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]

Merge and delete into 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. No need for a separate page but it is significant enough story that grabbed the world news. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 07:56, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Yoninah (talk) 18:01, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete at most worthy of a single line in an article discussing the protestors. --Salix alba (talk): 18:46, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems like another aspect of the storming that is WP:NOTNEWS. JayJay^{What did I do?} 22:05, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: not every particularity of the Capitol protest needs to have its own article. ... discospinster _talk 23:49, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Robert Keith Packer (either Merge into the controversy article, or into the biographical article). Banana Republic (talk) 00:26, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Some Dude From North Carolina^{wanna talk?} 01:20, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and delete into 2021 storming of the United States Capitol would be the best solution.TH1980 (talk) 02:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
delete as there is no controversy over whether the shirt is offensive or what it means. If there isn't a sentence or two in the article over specifically antisemitic slogans worn at the Capitol invasion, they can be added, but there's no need for a redirect and certainly no need to include any of the ostentatious padding which this article represents. Mangoe (talk) 04:52, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
delete WP:NOTNEWS Dmoore5556 (talk) 05:10, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Falls under WP:NOTNEWS.Less Unless (talk) 11:02, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the content to Robert Keith Packer, currently nominated for deletion also. This content would be WP:UNDUE in the main 2021 storming article so a merge to the event article would cut this content. We should keep it in some form, and I prefer the biography to an event article. In the biography deletion discussion I argued that this event is part of three stories: the Capitol storm, the state of Antisemitism, and sales policy of stores with political products. There are multiple media perspectives published now and we can reasonably expect future coverage including the outcome of the court case. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:43, 17 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]

Merge part of the content with 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. The content is referenced and is part of the events of the second article. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, maybe rewrite and merge some of the content but this wouldn't be terribly useful as a redirect, either. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 01:25, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:TENYEARTEST. This should be dealt with in the main article about the storming if at all. There have been far too many of these fork articles of questionable value.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 06:56, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, although to which article is up to the closing admin. Far too much WP:UNDUE. Bearian (talk) 23:03, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete & Redirect per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:UNDUE... first, there is no real controversy here, merely a momentary trend of general dislike that spread across the internet... second, 15 minutes of attention (not exactly fame) because some guy wore some shirt and happened to be on the news is in no way encyclopedic... he personally fails WP:BLP1E, and his choice of clothing should barely garner a mention on the main article under "part of why he was arrested"... also per WP:TENYEARTEST (per Darryl Kerrigan), no one will remember him or his poor taste in clothing... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:22, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This got a lot of media attention that is not dying away quickly. The main article is too big as it is. But if it is merged, it remains a big deal and should get a couple of paragraphs, not a couple of sentences. —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:52, 19 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.