Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jagdpanther II

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. Skomorokh 04:53, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jagdpanther II

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

The primary editor has copied over an infobox from the Jagdpanther article and is adding nonsensical text. He's ignored requests for more information and has blanked the talk page regarding the requests once. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

rewrite since a Jagdpanther II is a Panther II based Jagdpanzer, or just redirect it to Jagdpanther... 76.66.196.139 (talk) 04:02, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- But there was never any concrete proposal for any such development using the Panther II chassis according to Spielberger's Panther book and Jentz's Jagdpanther book. So any such development seems to be purely post-war speculation and hence not notable. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 07:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 00:51, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Appears to be a hoax - a Google search doesn't return any meaningful results: [1]. Nick-D (talk) 01:02, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete appears not to be based in fact. Buckshot06(prof) 03:46, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above arguments. Google would appear to show that no such tank was created, and no (admittedly limited) cllection of armoured warfare books doesn't highlight any such vehicle either. Skinny87 (talk) 12:56, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The German language wiki lacks any mention of it. Tangurena (talk) 13:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The creator of this article appear to have created other articles about German military equipment. Are they equally ficticious? Edward321 (talk) 13:39, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to have generally confined himself to only a couple of articles, most of which have been turned into redirects. The 15cm Nebelwerfer 41 article is on a legitimate weapon, but I'd need to check on the info box to see if the data is legit or not. Actually, what I need to do is to write the damn article. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:35, 9 September 2009 (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.