Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hans Dobek


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:00, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Hans Dobek

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article created by User:OberRanks, known for falsifying sources (see User:Future Perfect at Sunrise/OberRanks for analysis). In addition to the general problem of source credibility, we have a special verification and notability problem here: we don't even know what this person's name was. This is an otherwise non-notable military officer (clearly failing WP:MILBIO as such), whose only moment of potential notability is that he once dodged active participation in a massacre of civilians (a "one-event" notability at best). But the name of the guy who did that is given in various reliable sources in multiple different versions: some sources say it was one Hans (or Johann) Dobek, while others say it was somebody called Hellmuth (or Helmuth) Dobrick (or Dobbrick). So, are "Dobek" and "Dobrick" the same person? The article's lead sentence currently implies that we are dealing with a single man who genuinely went under two different names, which is highly unlikely. Is one of the two names the correct one and the other simply a mis-spelling? Or were there actually two men, one Dobek and one Dobrick? In the latter case, were both of them connected to that SS unit in Rome? If yes, which of these men is this article about? Do we know that the guy whose (non-)role in the Ardeatine massacres is mentioned in sources is the same one about whom we have (non-reliably sourced) biographical data?

Even if we could find answers to these questions: The fact that none of the reliable sources in the literature that mention him even goes so far as to notice the objective contradiction in the sources, let alone comment on it or explain it, just demonstrates that none of them has taken Dobek/Dobrick as a subject of biographical interest in its own right; that's the clearest proof of non-notability. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:43, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:38, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Given the dearth of sources, and the fact that the article creator is site banned for chronic source fabrication and source misrepresentation, we can't even assume anything included in the article that's not well sourced is true. One source is a discussion forum, one is simply an obituary, and one is a 404, so we can't trust a word of it. Even without the problems with the author and even if we could trust the content, I'm still not seeing notability. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 *  Comment Delete the sources I could find were in Italian and German, which appear to briefly mention Dobek (with this spelling) and his non-involvement in the massacres. In Italian there is this and in German the Prauser article in Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte is available via JSTOR and may have more detail on Dobek. At this stage I'm not seeing significant coverage in multiple reliable sources to meet the GNG, but I will look at the JSTOR article shortly to see if there is enough there. Footnotes 1 and 2 are definitely not RS. Definitely does not meet WP:SOLDIER. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:47, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The Prauser article is now online here: . It does mention "Dobek" briefly (on the page indicated, p.292f.), also noting that some of the primary sources call him Dobrick instead (the author marks that with a "[sic]"). There's a brief discussion of whether he actually refused an order to participate in the massacre or whether he simply maneuvred to have it done by others, and a remark that he died before the end of the war and could therefore never be asked about it. It doesn't match the contents that are being cited to it in the article. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:58, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree with your summation. I'd say he doesn't meet the GNG threshold and this article should be deleted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:58, 5 September 2018 (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.