Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olof Strömstierna

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The result was nomination withdrawn after User:Theleftorium's rewrite of the article. Hegvald (talk) 11:58, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Olof Strömstierna

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a near-nonsensical machine-translation from an article in the Swedish Wikipedia about a Swedish admiral. It has now remained in nearly its original state for several months. In my view this type of contribution should be discouraged, and credit for starting the page should be given to whoever eventually makes half an effort to write an article, rather than just taking a foreign article and running it through Google Translate. There are enough people who read Swedish and write decent English around for someone to write a proper article eventually. However, rather than completely erasing it, I would suggest moving this to User:Waase/Olof Strömstierna in order to encourage the user who posted it to continue working on it and repost it in a non-gibberish version. --Hegvald (talk) 08:58, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Not all bad translations can be blamed on computers. Some can be blamed on human translators who overestimate their command of the target language. If the topic is notable (and it appears to be), this is a case for cleanup rather than deletion. – Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may not change your view, but if you knew Swedish you would see how this is obviously translated by a machine (literal translations of personal names is one sign of this). --Hegvald (talk) 09:26, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hegvald is probably right about this article and the other two translations from Swedish. I just wish that the articles could be salvaged rather than deleted. - Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If they were to be moved to user subpages, no content would actually be lost. --Hegvald (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. – Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:RUBBISH. The article should be cleaned up, not deleted. Here's a good reference that could be used: [1] (Svenskt biografiskt handlexikon). The leftorium 10:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Theleftorium, if you finish your "cleanup" of the article, you can consider this nomination withdrawn. But I think you will find that doing so will be little different from rewriting the whole article from scratch, which makes it rather unnecessary for Wikipedia to accept automatic translations like this one in the first place. (As for the availability of sources, this was never an issue. I suspect that a bit of research may even uncover more up-to-date sources than a compact biographical dictionary from 1906). --Hegvald (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I understand what you mean about automatic translations. It's definitely not a good option, and the text in this article would be copyvio if it wasn't in the public ___domain. I do think, however, that stubbing or rewriting is a better option than deletion. I'll clean up the remainder of the article now. :) The leftorium 11:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've finished the cleanup now. The leftorium 11:43, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.