Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fritz Amling

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 no consensus. As with many of the similar debates being closed today, there is no real consensus here that would be actionable. Perhaps it may be an idea for these topics to collectively be discussed with regards to the policy, as their route through AFD seems to be proving both slow and contentious, and relistings are rarely triggering much more than a trickle of additional thought. Either way, I will close this as a no consensus at this time. KaisaL (talk) 02:56, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fritz Amling

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

Does not meet GNG; meets WP:Soldier, but I'm unable to locate significant coverage by RS; pls see Google books result. He appears to be included in the Sturmgeschütze Vor! ("Assault Guns Ready for Action!") by Franz Kurowski, but this source is not RS, as outlined in the linked article. The other sources seem to be collections of primary material such as Franz Thomas, ‎Günter Wegmann K.e.coffman (talk) 07:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 08:42, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 08:42, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 08:42, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 08:42, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a recipient of the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross, he mets WP:SOLDIER, so the assumption is that there are sufficient reliable sources to have an article on him (ie that he will meet WP:GNG. This nomination smacks of overzealousness. I fail to see why there is a need to delete this article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:01, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nom's comment: WP:Soldier states that:

"In general, an individual is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources. In particular, individuals will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify if they: Were awarded their nation's highest award for valour." The footnote states: "Some awards are/were bestowed in different grades. For the purpose of this notability guide only the highest military grade of such awards qualifies. See: Discussion regarding awards with multiple grades."

While the Knight's Cross was a prestigious award, it was not the highest grade (there ware Oak Leaves, Swords, Diamonds, etc). The subject fails GNG, which still needs to be met. here's a mention in the photo caption standing next to Walter Model, but being pictured next to a famous person is not sufficient to establish notability: Walther Model by Robert Forczyk; the rest of the Google books search results do not look promising, with non-RS author Franz Kurowski (Sturmgeschütze Vor! - Assaults Gun Ready for Action!) and collections of primary materials by Franz Thomas, ‎Günter Wegmann.

Separately, as has been suggested on my Talk page, I'm including an October 2015 version of the article, before I edited it. It uses a link to another wikipedia article as a citation, to support the number for the claim of the tanks destroyed. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've explained elsewhere in your multiple nominations that you need to do your due diligence. Have you checked the German Encyclopedia of Biography? It is available online and is free. Make an effort beyond a Google Books search, they are notoriously unreliable when dealing with people whose native language wasn't English, I have a lot of experience of this with Serbo-Croat sources. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion re: Neue Deutsche Biographie, which I checked. There's no entry for the subject in the encyclopedia. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:07, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: as a compromise solution. If the awards are verified, but there isn't significant coverage (or sigcov hasn't yet been determined due to the language barrier), a redirect to the main list of recipients (List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (A)) is possibly a fair solution. If significant coverage can be found at a later date, then the article can be quite easily revived. Thoughts? AustralianRupert (talk) 00:17, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:44, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. When I do the search a slightly different way (searching for "Oberwachtmeister Fritz Amling") I come up with eight sources in English and German. Some of these are "trivial" coverage per WP:SIGCOV, some are marginal. On balance, however, this seems enough to meet WP:GNG, though I acknowledge that it's not clearcut. Fiachra10003 (talk) 14:11, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: When I search for the term "Oberwachtmeister Fritz Amling" in Google books, I come up with three sources, one of which is non RS Franz Kurowski; please see: sample of his writing. Another one is a list of the subject's awards; as a directory, it is not "significant coverage" and thus "does not constitutes evidence of notability". Plus a one line mention in Model's biography. This does not appear to amount to "significant coverage". K.e.coffman (talk) 23:07, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:25, 26 June 2016 (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.