No article found for “Arterial pressure band?action=edit&redlink=1”.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Stele Always Remember

☆ Save On Wikipedia ↗
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. asilvering (talk) 10:36, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

International Stele Always Remember

International Stele Always Remember (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This doesn't seem to have encyclopedic merit, and the article itself is very thin: no artist, no discussion, and no proof of notability Ba.Ki (talk) 04:57, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 04:37, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 08:26, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete, very thin for a article, only 1 sentence.
Versions111 (talk) 14:19, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
That's the definition of a stub, not a source assessment. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:20, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep Echoing Kryn I concur that a memorial to a global pandemic in a major world capital is notable. I do believe that there will be more sources "auf deutsche" in contemptuous newspapers etc. This link already points the way to expansion. No Swan So Fine (talk) 15:35, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 19:17, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Reluctant delete. Of the two sources added since nomination, , the first is not independent (published by the group that currently maintains the monument) and the second is not reliable (self-published blog). I have made an effort to locate German sources, but it is difficult due to the generic name of this monument. Searching for "Stele Gegen das Vergessen", I only get passing mentions . We do not have the sources to show that this monument meets the GNG, though I am aware that German newspaper archives are not very searchable and a deep research effort could in future turn up better sources. Toadspike [Talk] 22:17, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
    @Toadspike Are you open to changing your vote to merge to List of public art in Berlin? It's a shame for this content to be deleted from Wikipedia altogether. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:39, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
    @Another Believer That list consists only of links to artworks with articles, so merged content would be very out of place. I would support a redirect to List of public art in Berlin where all we'd retain is the name of this monument, unless someone decides to flesh out all entries on the list with a blurb.
    I agree that it's a shame we have to delete content sometimes. Toadspike [Talk] 09:54, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
  • WP:IAR Ignore all rules may apply as this would be a commonsense application and exception. The notability of the stele seems apparent, as to location and topic. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:20, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
    Look, I hate to be that guy, but the notability of this stele is not apparent to me. We have precisely zero independent sources with significant coverage. If you'd like to expand List of public art in Berlin to a format where we can keep more of this content, be my guest. Toadspike [Talk] 23:39, 26 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete for lack of sourcing to evidence notability. I would accept a redirect to List of public art in Berlin but this is not a keep !vote. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 29 September 2025 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.