Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nazi Party members
The list is muich improved, with unreferenced redlink entries removed, and apparently with persons who have articles for things other than incidental party membership (ie, not notable primarily for being Nazis) removed.  unless all redlink names are removed and all memberships are reliably referenced. In general it is unacceptable to throw up hundreds of names in any list which says they are in some way reprehensible, without a reliable source. The German encyclopedia is not a reliable source, any more than the English Wikipedia. Are any of the persons still living? A redlink listing a living person as a Nazi is a BLP violation unless a reliable source is present in the List article itself. Use a category, and only for persons whose membership is reliable sourced.Some of the articles do not explicitly say the person was a Nazi, and the reader has to infer it from their military or governmental position. Do not just throw a mass of calumny into a list and expect others to source it, or resort to handwaving assertion that some foreign language Wikipedia is all the reference that is required.  This would be just as true for a "List" of  terrorists, thieves, charlatans, murderers, traitors, incompetent professionals, people with a loathsome disease, etc. Claiming "Work in progress" does not trump .  There were likely hundreds or thousands of people in Nazi controlled countries in WW2 with the same name as many of the redlink party members, and without an article or reference, all those innocent people and their descendants are branded unjustly. This is as bad as the "No Fly" list. I knew someone who lived during those years who had the same name as one of the redlink Nazis, but who definite;y wasn't one
— User:Edison, 19:42, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:V (Wikipedia:Verifiability)