Talk:Albrecht Lanz

Alfred Lanz tags
Discussion on notability from User talk:Jerseyman abroard and User talk:Deb is as follows:

[OnDeb's talk page]

Hi Deb, thanks for taking the time to patrol the page. You added three tags, notability, source reliability, and no categories. Obviously you were correct to add the no cats tag, but I would dispute the first two. This bloke was the commandant of 163,857 people (well, probably around 100,000 as that's today's figure). He controlled the Channel Islands for a time, and got the highest award for valour, the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross (which makes him notable per WikiProject MILHIST guidelines). Is it OK if I remove the tags? Thanks, Jerseyman abroard (talk) 09:51, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * (Just realised the source reliability tag wasn't addressed above. I'll correct my mistake shortly. Thanks, Jerseyman abroard (talk) 09:51, 14 April 2015 (UTC))
 * There are three sources: the Guernsey Occupation Museum, which backs up dates used in source 2. Source 2, Barry Turner's book Outpost of Occupation, is probably notable in its own right, having been reviewed in The Mail and by discussed by the BBC. Source 3, Eastern Inferno by Hans Roth is published by Casermate Publishers, a company which publishes military books. Therefore, I am afraid that I cannot see either notability issues or source issues here. Thanks, Jerseyman abroard (talk) 10:07, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I replied on my talk. Thanks for the quick response, Jerseyman abroard (talk) 11:01, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

[On Jerseyman abroard's talk page]

Hi. The notability tag indicates that I am questioning the notability of this officer. However, two of the three sources are good. The third appears to be a self-published book. This doesn't in itself make it unreliable, but see WP:SELFPUB.Deb (talk) 10:56, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, I am aware what the notability tag means. I'm not sure where it says the third is self-published, I highly suspect that Roth is dead. I left an analysis of the sources on your talk page. What I was curious about was what doesn't make him notable, as he has his nation's highest award for valour, and commandant of the entire Channel Islands. Thanks, Jerseyman abroard (talk) 11:01, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I wasn't clear. It's the Barry Turner book that appears to be self-published.  As for notability, I was meaning to emphasize the word "questioning" rather than my stating outright that he's not notable.  If I was sure he wasn't notable, I'd probably have deleted the article.  Have a look at other articles on other German officers and also the Notability page (if you haven't already). It would be a good idea to have at least his dates of birth and death in the article. Deb (talk) 11:49, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I was wondering if you meant the other source when writing a reply. Turner's book was called a "new and well-balanced account" by The Mail, and was used in depth both on The Mail and BBC websites to analyse the actions of Churchill and the Channel Islands. I took a look at the MILHIST guidelines before writing the article, and they state:

"In particular, individuals will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify if they:
 * Were awarded their nation's highest award for valour;[1] or
 * Played an important role in a significant military event"

Lanz did both of those, hence my article. I share your frustration that there are not more facts available, (actually, I've just found some dates). Given that the sources are reliable and he is notable under notability guidelines, would it be possible to remove the tags please ? Thanks, Jerseyman abroard (talk) 12:06, 14 April 2015 (UTC)


 * That sounds okay. I'll untag it but maybe you could copy this discussion to the talk page for the article, to make sure it's clear we've discussed it. Deb (talk) 12:11, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, I'll do that. Thank you for discussing so promptly. All the best, Jerseyman abroard (talk) 12:13, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Sure, Mac, sure
Donald Trump and Boris Johnson are living proof that Anglo-Saxons are blatant fools, but claiming that the Channel Islands were occupied earlier than Paris and Dunkerque tops it all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E2:3709:F815:20B6:8143:329C:4FB7 (talk) 13:28, 29 August 2020 (UTC)