< 2019 July 5
Deletion review archives: 2019 July
2019 July 7 >

6 July 2019

  • Red Haircrow – Deletion endorsed, no support for restoring the deleted version either. Hut 8.5 16:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
Red Haircrow (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

More recent and continuing references and sources that are significant, unsupported opinions on self-promotion and conflict of interest Contributingauthor (talk) 11:55, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I doubt that you will get anywhere with this request unless you give details of the sources you wish to use rather than simply state that they exist. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:07, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you. I was attempting to do just that when you edited/added your comment. Contributingauthor (talk) 12:13, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I can total understand if a topic was decided to be "not of noteworthiness", which is a known issue and reason many articles are deleted or the note place about this lack. If that is the eventual decision during this appeal, of course I'd accept it. However, the comments to support the deletion seemed of personal opinion like the criticism of my user name, and stating self promotion and/or conflict of interest without verifiable or substantiated reasons. I responded on the Talk page, giving reasons and examples, which can be seen in the archived edition. I believe a revised page relisted with significant updated information or the allowance of recreation should be considered, thank you.
The information I had posted in the discussion and newer sources

1. Interview on RT UK "Jimmy Nelson, Indigenous Photographer" (Sept. 2018): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enhILUv9lDo

2. Director/producer documentary film, "Forget Winnetou! Loving in the Wrong Way" (June 2018) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6494700/?ref_=rvi_tt and https://forgetwinnetou.com/ 

   a. imdb profile https://www.imdb.com/name/nm8754173/?ref_=tt_ov_wr
   b. Audience Award for "Forget Winnetou!" (2018) at "Refugees Welcome Film Festival (Oct. 2018) http://www.refugeesfilmfest.com/winners.html?fbclid=IwAR3IRRm970S92KuHZBmwqZlnZqsGoQKrAYbRjSM0kxgj5wwQUxhMf87P-gQ

3. Appearance as himself in CBC documentary by Drew Hayden Taylor, "Searching for Winnetou" (Jan. 2018), https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7958836/?ref_=nv_sr_1 a documentary film by Drew Hayden Taylor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Hayden_Taylor. At CBC website https://www.cbc.ca/cbcdocspov/episodes/searching-for-winnetou

4. Interview on WDR Zeitzeichen‘s broadcast on “The Indian Citizenship Act”, June 2019 . https://www1.wdr.de/radio/wdr5/sendungen/zeitzeichen/indianer-102.html

Contributingauthor (talk) 12:31, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply] 

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contributingauthor (talk • contribs) 12:27, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are you, or are you connected with, Red Haircrow? If you don't have a conflict of interest then there are good grounds to summarily overturn that AFD because it was mistaken on the central reason for deletion. But those are sources not dissimilar to the ones already considered at AFD. —S Marshall T/C 16:30, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I am not connected with Red Haircrow.
    But as anyone might know the AfD is a conversative to far right German organization that is very opposed to non-white German people, immigrants, etc. and it is considered a racist party by many Germans so it is really absurd if anyone added an affiliation with AfD to someone like Mr. Haircrow. Contributingauthor (talk) 20:35, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse - The close appears to have been reasonable. The appellant is entitled to a reasonable AFD and close, and they got one. They may be saying that it wasn't a perfect AFD. There is a rule in American criminal appellate law that the defendant is entitled to a fair trail, not a perfect one, and we aren't required to provide the same due process as US state courts are. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:29, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse the AfD was closed correctly. The suspicion of a conflict of interest seems reasonable and one which I'd love for Contributingauthor to respond to. As it's been 7 months since the AfD if there were new sources that wouldn't prohibit recreation, even without a DRV, in my mind. However, the quality of the sources listed here are not the kind that are generally thought to help establish notability and as such I would not suggest recreating the article with those sources. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:05, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse. There's two possible reasons to overturn an AfD. One is that the close did not correctly summarize the discussion. That's clearly not the case here. The other is that better sources have appeared since the AfD. None of the sources presented here are what we need, so that's not the case either. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse While the article is probably eligible to be re-created by now, the AFD was, in my opinion, definitely correctly closed. However, the deletion comments of a potential conflict of interest are...worrying, as they don't actually cite any plausible reason why Contributingauthor may have a conflict of interest, other than that he contributes largely to that article, which, unless the individual edits would suggest a COI, simply contributing to the article for most of their Wikipedia history doesn't imply a conflict of interest. EggRoll97 (talk) 15:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
More