Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/German firefighting fitness badge


 * 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 delete. czar ⨹   17:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

German firefighting fitness badge

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable award. No independent sources to prove the notability. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:34, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:52, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:52, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:52, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion this award respectively this article is not a non-notable award. Three reasons: #1 German fire services is a relevant topic and sports keep German fire services going. Physical strength is tested by "German firefighting fitness badge". #2 There are only two awards for german firefighters that can be achieved in sports: 1. "Leistungsnachweis" is a sports competition in firefighting-techniques. 2. "German firefighting fitness badge" is awarded for physical strength. #3 "German firefighting fitness badge" is the one and only physical fitness decoration just for firefighters. German Sports Badge for example is eligible for everyone. (Benutzer:Spirobranchus - 16:19, 12, December 2014)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 18:19, 13 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete: no coverage in secondary sources, all references are primary.Vrac (talk) 21:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  18:37, 21 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - needs to have received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Hasn't.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 04:33, 22 December 2014 (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.