Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herman Rietzel


 * 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. The consensus below is that there are sufficient sources to support an article. Eluchil404 (talk) 05:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Herman Rietzel

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article is about a 19 year old that died in 1882. A notability tag was removed because of the sources. Out of the four sources, the last three are obviously only about the death while I am unable to read the first one. He was a musician and people that saw him play praised him, but he didn't make an impact because he drowned when he was 19. "According to an official of Steinway and Sons, Rafael Joseffy spoke highly of Rietzel's promise." Exactly, they thought that he could be famous, but he never got a chance to. I cannot find anything that was not written just because of his death. WP:BIO1E. SL93 (talk) 21:09, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 21:16, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been notified to WikiProject Classical music. – Voceditenore (talk) 22:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak delete There really doesn't seem to be enough here to merit a stand-alone article. George Conly, who drowned in the same accident is much more notable. Alas, Rietzel's life (what little we know of it) is destined to be a very obscure footnote in musical history. I'd suggest that if/when an article on Conley is created, the small amount of information about Rietzel that is available could be added there and then a re-direct made to it from Herman Rietzel. Voceditenore (talk) 22:54, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep — in most afds like this one notability can be established (or not), and we can come to a decision without too much trouble. This is one of those rarer cases where it is more difficult. Clearly Rietzel was a public figure, and the subject of media attention, however brief. For that reason I think the article should be kept, though I don't feel strongly about this. -- Klein zach  23:26, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep – Providing supporting material for obscure footnotes: that's what encyclopedias do. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep – Per reliable sources already in the article:
 * "George Conly's Sad Fate: Drowned in a New Hampshire Lake with Young Herman Rietzel, the Pianist," The New York Times, May 28, 1882.
 * "Herman Rietzel's Body Found," The New York Times, June 8, 1882.
 * "The Conly Benefit Concert," The New York Times, June 11, 1882.
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 09:43, 2 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I agree with Kleinzach that this is a truly borderline case. If this were a 19 year old pianist who had drowned last year at the same stage in his career and had the same amount of coverage (really very little, if you read the sources), I suspect it might have been more clear-cut. Voceditenore (talk) 10:35, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Google stopped working on their news archiving. Most old articles aren't archive so you can't tell how much coverage they got.   D r e a m Focus  01:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. This article is a biography that is properly sourced. Obituaries or news articles concerning the death of a person are not disqualified by the notability guidelines. (A birth or death announcement inserted by friends or family would be.) Nor is it a news story about a boating accident, so why should it be merged with another person's biography (which has not even been written), just because that person happened to die in the same accident? --Robert.Allen (talk) 18:17, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep They wouldn't speak of the person in their death in such a way, if they hadn't been a notable figure. Since we can't search every single newspaper published at that time, we can only assume from what we can find, that this person had ample coverage back in their day.   D r e a m Focus  01:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with New York Philharmonic Society. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:30, 8 December 2011 (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.