Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polish death camp controversy
I see not so much as an insinuation here that there isn't concern within the Polish community as to the use of certain terms. The nomination had to do with two issues: the notion that there was "controversy" (when not one example was provided), and the opinion that much of the article amounted to original research.  We now have one example (a CTV news story) in which the use of two terms "Polish ghetto" and "Polish camp" brought controversy. While I don't feel that this is enough to justify the title (I appear to be alone in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Polish_death_camp_controversy&diff=228714249&oldid=228706150 suggesting an alternate), I don't think it a reason for deletion. The issue of original research appears to have been laid to rest by Mansford in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polish_death_camp_controversy&diff=231009026&oldid=230999658 removing the "Examples" section. While this deletion has yet to be challenged, I think it important to point out that previous attempts to make more minor adjustments to this section prior to this AfD were quickly reversed. It seems that what was once defended is now recognized as |original research. My recommendation that the article be kept should not suggest that I don't see problems. I agree with DGG's comments on the sentence "The phrases such as the "Polish death camp" leave a false impression that it might have been the Poles who were responsible for the Nazi German genocide". Furthermore, I question the sentence which follows "While in some cases the intention of the writers is the mere geographical use of the term 'Polish' and no attribution of responsibility is actually intended, at least one Polish diplomat has suggested that there are instances of "bad will. Under the pretext that 'it’s only a geographic reference', attempts are made to distort history and conceal the truth." In "some cases" more than implies that there exists an unspecified percentage of cases in which ill-intent comes into play; and yet, we are presented with no evidence of such - even in the CTV case. These concerns alone are not enough to call for deletion
— User:Ffighter44, 17:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:OR (Wikipedia:No original research)