Talk:Klaus Huhn

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 July 2015. The result of the discussion was keep.

Notability and wp:blp issues

there are two weak sources for this wp:blp person and a lot of controversial detail, is he really notable for an article here, I am seeing an aspect of attack - one of the sources is imo very opinionated as well? Govindaharihari (talk) 05:43, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The "attacking" source is well described as such in the article - one does not get the idea that this page is written to support the notion that he was a Stasi agent. The fact that Focus magazine even feels the need to write an article accusing Huhn of being a Stasi collaborator should be enough to show notability. Mr.choppers | ✎ 13:09, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If I had a ball in the game I would be bothered and agree with you but I haven't so I neutrally see this person as having very limited note and the page as an attack, imho, any other uninvolved person would agree with me Govindaharihari (talk) 15:20, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you kicked your ball into next door's garden when you nominated this article for deletion? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:53, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He is not wp:notable , sorry - good attack page as usual on wikipedia Govindaharihari (talk) 15:56, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the only person under attack here is your good self. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:58, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

yes, by you and your involved mates, bothered, not Govindaharihari (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How exactly have I "attacked" you? Why should editors who vote the same way suddenly become my "mates"? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:04, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Govindaharihari: I am sorry, but what is my "ball in this game"? What exactly are you accusing me of? Mr.choppers | ✎ 15:30, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]