Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heinrich Schoeneich


 * 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. Everyone seems to be doing the right thing here. Nominator asserts an inability to find ready sources; !voters in this process seem to think sufficient sourcing is already applied and significance is asserted. Page creator has shown themselves willing to discuss and has made significant efforts to remove overly detailed material, per talk page discussions (and in response to this procedure). BusterD (talk) 04:33, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Heinrich Schoeneich

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Overly-detailed article by WP:SPA. I'm not convinced the subject meets WP:GNG—I've been unable to find much on Google Scholar, the Wikipedia Library, or newspapers.com. See discussions at Talk:Heinrich Schoeneich and on the author's talk page. –Ploni (talk) 18:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:25, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Germany. Ploni (talk) 18:00, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Hello Ploni. Thank you for your review of my article. It will probably be difficult for me to revise it to meet the criteria of the English-language Wikipedia (which it seems to have somehow managed to do in its yesterday's form for three years (?), but since I agree with you that it contained too much detail in relation to its overall length, I have thinned it out as a first step. That doesn't make it stylistically better, but at least less detailed. Perhaps this is a starting point where someone with more wiki experience and an innate linguistic competence would like to jump to my side, I would be very grateful for that. Otherwise, I see little chance for me to "defend" the article, as I can do little about the other points of your critique: Neither can I change the fact that no other articles refer to it, nor can I prove that, as already confirmed, there is no conflict of interest (how does one prove that one is or is not a Buddhist), nor can I give the subject a more prominent position on the international medical stage. The reason I suggested the article was not so much the surgeon's medical achievements, but his (officially and publicly recognised) work as a humanitarian activist in his area of expertise. Perhaps placing him in a category other than medicine would somewhat mitigate the contestability of his encyclopaedic significance. Marinus von Eisenstein (talk) 11:39, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:16, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, quite a lot of reports of his humanitarian work in many German newspapers, notable enough. —Kusma (talk) 12:37, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep Several mentions of his work in Burma, and I also saw a few studies that he was involved with. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 00:30, 24 July 2022 (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.