Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theory of Hitler´s escape

Theory of Hitler´s escape

Theory of Hitler´s escape (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Article is original research. A typical conspiracy theory --Church of emacs (Talk | Stalk) 17:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Certainly notable conspiracy theory, only concern is the current state of the article. Needs quite a lot of referencing, rewriting and general clean-up. M0RD00R (talk) 17:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Agree the article needs a lot of work, but most of these theories are published elsewhere, so someone just needs to cite sources for the genuine published theories (however whacky), and delete the imaginary, original research ones. Any volunteers? Perhaps we should add a comment that these theories are rejected by most historians. Dbfirs 19:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll join in the fun of rewriting/citing if there are any website references. I don't have any books on the subject. Reconvene on the talk page I suppose? -FrankTobia (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The best reference seems to be a book called "Hitler's Escape" by Ron T Hansig. Published in 2005 by Athena Press; ISBN 1932077820. A synopsis can be found at www.hitlersescape.com. I don't have access to the text of the book, and I don't know where Mr Hansig stands on the Crackpot -> Historian scale, but he seems to have put forward an argument slightly stronger than those on which several other Wikipedia articles are based. (perhaps they should all be deleted?) (but I can remember when Global warming used to be in this category!) Dbfirs 21:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - Looks like original research, maybe an essay. It worries me that there are no sources. If this is a notable and verifiable conspiracy theory, we need sources or else it's no better than idle speculation. Generally I agree with M0RD00R's comment, and I feel that it would need a rewrite from the ground up to be a decent article, so a delete wouldn't hurt anyone. At the same time, the facts are pretty hard if they can be supported with references, but even then it still violates WP:SYN. -FrankTobia (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Probably belongs in shortened, impeccably sourced form in Death of Adolf Hitler. Right now it isn't clear that this is not largely synthesis of sources, though. --Dhartung | Talk 19:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - If there is an article on the death of Hitler, we certainly don't need this as well. OR and ?notable as well. Scolaire (talk) 21:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - As per previous comments. Pity this didn't come with a .wav file of "Springtime for Hitler" Ecoleetage (talk) 02:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - Per comments above. ~Ambrosia- ^talk 04:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, WP:OR.  Esradekan Gibb  ^"Talk" 08:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The statement that there were no sources is simply wrong: the sources are the newspaper articles and the autobiography. There are only no internet links. But all the newspaper articles can be found in archives. And the autobiography "Frankly Speaking"....I have that autobiography and the statement, given in this article is true. So, there ARE sources, but no internet sources.