Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of most successful U-boat commanders

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Keep and split/rename into List of World War I U-boat commanders and List of World War II U-boat commanders Consensus is against retaining the "most successful" and "ranking" portions of the article, but retaining (if revising) the content as sortable lists. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:21, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of most successful U-boat commanders (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is the only list like this on the English Wikipedia. That would in itself not disqualify it from existence, but compare to the closest topic area, fighter aces. None of them use this title format (ex: List of World War II aces from China). Next ask yourself, "Can this not be part of a greater "List of submarine commanders", or a series of them by war and nation?" Do we really need to have this big temple to the German military here? ♠Vami_IV†♠ 16:57, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The question of whether the ranking criteria are OR needs more discussion; splitting wouldn't resolve that. Editos should also discuss whether removing the ranking, making it a mere alphabetical list, would resolve the problem as an alternative to deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:02, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I and somebody else suggested was taking out the "most successful" bit from the list (or lists). That takes care of the OR issue. The number of ships/tonnage sunk is documented. If someone did want to rank them, then letting them sort by those two columns (maybe number of patrols too?) would do the trick. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:38, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support the Clarityfiend Proposal. All "Most successful" bunk should be axed, and the list should be renamed and broken in half for the two World Wars. The lists should be ordered alphabetically by default, but use sortable tables and include details such as the date as a submarine commanders were active as such and tonnage sunk. For non-sortable columns, include submarines commanded by that individual. Let these new lists stand as examples for other submarine commander lists. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 21:10, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I additionally propose that awards should not be mentioned on these lists, and that they should not include the word "U-boat" in the title. That distinction should not be made because it is a tomato tomatoe situation. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 21:10, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Vami IV: We would stumble into WP:OR with a mere alphabetical list, because it would suggest to the reader that all the included persons are treated equally by the sources, which is obviously not the case. Your additional proposal that awards should be removed from the list does not appear to be policy-based, but based on WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Excluding "U-boat" from the title had already been suggested by My very best wishes, see above. Renewal6 (talk) 02:25, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am confused by the idea that alphabetical ordering by surname would be OR. It would be NPOV. My objection to inclusion of military awards is an objection to WP:SIZE bloat, which tables are prone to. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 02:41, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The ranking is based on facts discussed by reliable sources other than uboat.net, and it does not contain a personal opinion on the achievements of the German military. Hence, it does not violate WP:NPOV. It would be borderline OR to withhold the ranking from the reader, because the inclusion criteria for the list are directly connected to it. Otherwise, it may appear as though we present a list of 50 WW2 U-boat commanders that we arbitrarily consider to be the most notable. Objections to WP:SIZE are fine, but I think it's more reasonable to discuss them at the talk page of the article. Too many additional proposals on how to change the article just make it harder to reach a consensus on the actual topic of the AfD debate. Renewal6 (talk) 11:17, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A sortable table allows the table to be sorted however the reader wants it to be sorted, which is why I suggested it. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:20, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you on this point (see below). Renewal6 (talk) 23:53, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Lothar von Arnauld de la Perière and Otto Kretschmer are clearly referred to as the #1 U-boat commanders based on their tonnage sunk by reliable sources. Neither the ranking criteria nor the statistics they depend on are an invention of Wikipedia or uboat.net, so the list fulfills WP:NOR. Because of that, I would oppose removing the ranking itself, but support making the ships and tonnage sunk columns sortable. I agree with Clarityfiend that renaming the article by leaving out "most successful" resolves the legitimate WP:OR issues with the title format. Renewal6 (talk) 21:06, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split per Clarityfiend. This is is a SYNTH list, and combining the performance of commanders in two different wars has no basis in the sources. Probably only done because the Germans happened to call their ships "U-boats" during the both conflicts, and that's not enough. -Indy beetle (talk) 02:04, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as topic is notable, but it needs renamingJackattack1597 (talk) 22:06, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:47, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Keep Always necessary to read through an article's history before beginning a deletion process. It was merged in 2008 with an article called "List of U-Boat Aces." Then renamed "List of Successful U-Boat Commanders," then renamed "List of Most Successful U-Boat Commanders" as the page only listed "top scorers." That answers your first question. Content-wise, rename it again if necessary, but it meets notability; this is an important piece of history and encyclopedic content. "List of U-Boat Commanders" could be good, as Renewal6 has proposed. Knightoften (talk) 04:31, 12 November 2021 (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.