Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alfred Kunz (Catholic priest)


 * 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 Rename to Murder of Alfred Kunz (Catholic priest) as per suggestion by Edison. Mike Cline (talk) 12:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Alfred Kunz (Catholic priest)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete per WP:VICTIM. The subject's only real claim to notability is the fact that he was murdered. 4meter4 (talk) 19:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC) Keep. He also had some significance in the traditionalist Catholic movement and had been mentioned in news articles prior to his death. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 15:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Would you please provide us with such sources. Unless we actually see them in evidence it does little good in the context of this discussion. Just having a few name mentions in newspaper articles prior to the murder is not enough. He needs to have multiple non-trivial coverage. That's only something that can be determined if we can have a look at the sources which you say exist. I wonder why you did not bother to include them in this article when you created it...? 4meter4 (talk) 15:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Assuming we can find sources that Kunz was a leader in the Traditionalist movement, then Keep. Bearian (talk) 21:33, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete (weak delete) Googling his name, there are many hits - but they're all about his death. Now, perhaps the unsolved death of a priest in a ritualistic manner is 'notable', but he himself doesn't SEEM to be.David V Houston (talk) 23:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep:It is one of the earliest examples/victims of sexual-abuse/paedophilia in the catholic church, a long time before the actual tidelwave of incidents. --Stijn Calle (talk) 07:47, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That arguement doesn't make any sense Stijn Calle. Kunz was not a victim or perpetrator of sexual abuse. He was involved in investigating possiible cases of such abuse. Such internal investigations have been going on in the Catholic Church for decades, so the fact that he was an investigator doesn't in itself make him notable. Further, the link between his murder and his work as an investigator is only a suspicion but not a fact according to the sources. Once again, no sources have been produced to establish his notability outside of being a victim of murder.4meter4 (talk) 02:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shimeru (talk) 22:20, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep and move to Murder of Alfred Kunz (Catholic priest). We generally cover the crime and not the victim. He may have had some notability before his death, per the above discussion. Actual specific reliable and independent sources with significant coverage would be helpful in this discussion. Then he was murdered in a bizarre way, and the murder gained book coverage with  extended coverage in more than one book, (which discussed his investigation of pedophiles among the priesthood)and press coverage  coverage over a wide area, including major out of state papers: . It gained the most massive investigation in the county's history . At the first anniversary of the murder, the Milwaukee paper said he was "an expert in church canon law"and "a hero to some conservative Catholics" for continuing the Latin rite after its 1965 downgrading by the Church The Sheriff said the murder might have been by someone objecting to his continuation of the old rituals. The notability of the murder is shown by coverage of the second anniversary , fourth anniversary , the fifth anniversary  and the sixth anniversary  in state papers and TV and the tenth anniversary in a national Catholic news source:, . Edison (talk) 03:18, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


 * 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.