Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florian Tschögl


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 02:44, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Florian Tschögl

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )
 * Questionable nobility notability; possible vanity piece. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 19:58, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Delete and Comment:
 * Delete: article fails WP:GNG.
 * Comment: there is no article for Tschögl in the German, Hebrew, or Yiddish wikipedias. While Tschögl would appear to not be notable, I would most strongly argue that the article is not a "vanity piece" - see this Google Books result.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:23, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * What is GNG?? Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 17:46, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * A typo. Oops.  Apologies.--Shirt58 (talk) 10:17, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep: according to Die Gerechten Österreichs. Dewritech (talk) 20:18, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: this one is difficult, in my opinion. My first thought is that the article falls foul of WP:ONEVENT, but that is not necessarily cut and dried. It is difficult to determine notability here because the article does not state how notable the award of Righteous Among the Nations is. Is it a high/notable award like the Medal of Honor/Victoria Cross? I don't know. What I am saying is that the article needs some more biographical details and information to help readers decide the notability of the subject. Is there anything else that could be added? Perhaps someone could translate a few of the sources: that might help reviewers make up their minds about the notability of this subject. Currently I don't think it has significant coverage in realiable sources. — AustralianRupert (talk) 02:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: for evaluating of notability see Righteous among the Nations; more details of bio might be difficult in cases like this: normal people doing extraordinary things secretly, often risking their life for their convictions - and afterward just continuing a "normal" life. Dewritech (talk) 08:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment The Righteous among the Nations award seems analogous to the awards listed at WikiProject Military history/Style guide that create a presumption of notability for their awardees.-- Pink Bull  19:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * According to the list on the article about the award there are over 22,000 recipients. Are we saying then that they are all notable enough for a Wikipedia article on the basis of that award? Within the military history project the notability bar for award recipients is usually set at the highest decoration a nation awards e.g MOH or Victoria Cross and equivalents (or multiple second level awards). This is so that there is a limit on the number of stubs that are created. My point with this comment is that such an award shouldn't necessarily confer automatic notability, the subject should also satisfy some of the broader notability guidelines such as significant coverage in reliable sources. So far the coverage seems limited to passing mentions. However, I'm not in a rush to see the article deleted so if someone can further expand the article with some biographical details and a statement of why receiving the award is notable, I would be fine with that. AustralianRupert (talk) 22:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 22,000 may not be that foreboding of an amount. The highest medal in the US has around 3,500 recipients (See Medal of Honor), the highest medal in the UK has around 1,500 recipients (See Victoria Cross), and the highest medal in the former USSR has around 13,000 (See Hero of the Soviet Union), to name a few countries. Also, unlike the Righteous among the Nations award which I imagine is closed to new recipients, there will likely be a steady increase in army medal of honor recipients.
 * The WP:ATHLETE standard allows for (probably) thousands of perma-stubs to be created each year. The bio of a Righteous among the Nations recipient is more likely to be interesting then the bio of a baseball player who played three games in the Major Leagues, but is now eligible for a stand-alone Wikipedia article due to WP:ATHLETE.
 * Regardless, I don't know if the Righteous among the Nations can fairly be compared to a country's highest medal of honor. Also, the notability standard at WikiProject Military history/Style guide has never been accepted as a notability guideline, and is only an essay. Just throwing the idea out there.-- Pink Bull  00:18, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shi  meru  03:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep Seems to be cleanly verifiable, and if the notability is at the border of what is and isn't, I'd rather lean towards inclusionism when there is verifiability. I think there's a decent chance this isn't a permastub, that someone will eventually be able to flesh this out with information from non-online sources, e.g., "ad Vashem" by Anton Maria Keim. --  j &#9883; e decker  talk  05:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. The information is verifiable and the award is fairly significant (it honorary citizenship and a pension from the State of Israel, should the recipient choose to live in Isreal).  Passes WP:BIO.  Movementarian (Talk) 08:47, 18 June 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.