Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Machemehl


 * 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. Not an easy decision, but a review of the sources shows that several have little or nothing to do with John Machemehl. Much of the information can be sourced only to a genealogy, and most problematically, the claims of notability are not sourced or supported. The sources do provide evidence for the notability of relatives, such as Louis Machemehl, but this does not confer notability on John by association. While I dislike deletion of historical biographies, what's needed here is a reliable (preferably secondary) source backing up the claim that John was a leader in the migration or the subsequently-established community. If we were to remove the uncited claims, the claims not properly supported by their citations, and the material relating to descendants from the article, we would be left with a very sparse collection of family data, mainly consisting of dates of birth, marriage, and death. Regrettably, this is not enough to meet WP:BIO. Shimeru 15:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

John Machemehl

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non notable person, fails WP:BIO. No reliable, independent sources establishing notability, only genealogical sources or sources about his descendants. He may have many notable qualities, as claimed on the talk page, but these aren't recognized in any independent reputable sources, which makes this look a lot like original research. Article fails WP:ATT. Fram 07:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Fram has already attempted to delete this article once before. The article John Machemehl was shown to be a notable article as John Machemehl is a historical figure within the German-Texan historical context. Thanks. User:Bhaktivinode 28 March 2007
 * Second attempt

In addition, Fram fails to state why these sources are not independent and/or reputable. They are valid sources and Fram should show otherwise if it believes so. Thanks. User:Bhaktivinode 28 March 2007
 * Please read WP:ATT and WP:RS to see what are reliable, reputable sources per the Wikipedia definition. The main source, dericbownds.net, is the page of someone who has created his family tree. This is not independent, and certainly not a reliable source in the Wikipedia sense. The other sources are not clearly reliable either (austinoldies.com / wintermannlibrary.org (a copy of the former), rootsweb.com) or have at first sight nothing to do with John Machemehl (visiteaglelake.com, reflectionsofyesterday.net, texas-settlement.org, sportsillustrated). In fact, all info on John Machemehl except for him being the father of Paul, comes from one source, Dericbownds.net. Fram 08:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment: I can't find evidence of a previous AFD discussion, but Bak may be referring to this diff, where it was nominated for Speedy A7. -- saberwyn 07:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The article was tagged for speedy deletion (db-bio) by user Evb-wiki on March 21, and deleted by me the same day. It was recreated by Bhaktivinode on the 23rd (as is his right), and tagged by me for db-bio on the 27th. This was removed by FloNight, with the mention on the talk page that it could go to AfD. This seemed reasonable, and so I did just that. The article was not "shown to be a notable article" expect by these statements on Talk:John Machemehl by the creator of the article, Bhaktivinode. As I indicate in my response to Bhaktivinode above, his one main source is not a reliable (nor an independent) source per WP:ATT, and neither that one nor his other sources are indicating any notability for John Machemehl (I have e.g. no idea where Bhaktivinode gets the idea that John Machemehl is a "notable German"). Fram 08:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment I believe Fram is only refering to the old version of John Machemehl. The new version explicitly establishes his notability first as the forester for Annaberg, Saxony. Then for leading a group of Forty-Eighters to Central Texas from Saxony. Another issue is his involvement with the German Texan community during the Civil War era. User:Bhaktivinode March 28, 2007
 * No, I'm referring to the current version. Besides, all the info was already in the article when I started this AfD notice, and even when I nominated it for speedy deletion. Being a forester etcetera is interesting, but does not mean he is notable. And I can't find anything in your sources that indicate that he was "Leading the Voyage to Texas"? The genealogy says that "Sometime between 1845 and 1850 John Machemehl, his father Michael and very young son Paul came to Texas from Germany. Their coming to the U.S. was part of the sizeable German migration". It seems like he was just one of the many migrants, and that only in the next generations did the family become somewhat notable locally. I would like to urge everyone judging this AfD to go through the sources provided in the article, to determine for themselves their value and the notability they give to John Machemehl, per WP:ATT and WP:BIO. Fram 10:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It is issues such as these listed above - that makes the John Machemehl entry a notable one. in addition, sources such as The Eula and David Wintermann Library is a proper source. & User:Bhaktivinode March 28, 2007
 * Issues and Sources
 * Perhaps the Wintermannlibrary is a notable source (it is not directly clear), but it only gives some info on Paul Machemehl, none whatsoever on John Machemehl, so this source cannot be used to determine the notability of John Machemehl. And I don't agree that the "issues" listed above make him notable at all. Fram 10:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment That is not true.

The Wintermann Library says that around the time of the Civil War that, "John was discussing the hostility between the North and the South with Paul Machemehl of Bellville, Texas. Many Germans did not believe this was their fight and many joined Paul Machemehl and rode south to Mexico to sit out the war before returning."

This is just one source. Thanks. User:Bhaktivinode March 28, 2007
 * The "John" referenced there is Johann Struss, not John Machemehl. Nothing there suggests that it is about John Machemehl. Fram 05:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per reasons for nomination. What is verifiable through reliable sources may be merged to the more adequately sourced descendants. Genealogy homepages crowding the refs do not meet WP:ATT, nothing to verify "noted forrester" or "leader of men", and there is currently advertising posing as a reference. M URGH   disc.  15:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment I would like to add that there are many points to consider in debating the notability of the John Machemehl article. Being the forester for the city of Annaberg, or the size of the migration are just a few of these points.

Aside from these points above is the context of John Machemehl in German-Texan history. Here, what is historically significant, aside from the points above, is that John Machemehl led a group of Forty-Eighters from Germany to Texas, not to any normal destination for German Forty-Eighters. This in itself is an important and notable event in the context of German-Texan history. There are many points to be considered. They should be treated one at a time. Please. Thank you. User:Bhaktivinode March 28, 2007 * Keep Some early pioneers will be notable, if they were political or community leaders. DGG 03:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep There is no reason that the information in ths article should not be added to Wikipedia. It is valid historically information that can be categorized in a manner to make it available to people interested in this type of information. FloNight 16:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article needs a little work, but the subject seems to be a notable historical figure on a regional basis. Realkyhick 04:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And on what reliable source do you three base that assertion? We only have a genealogical site by a direct descendant as "evidence" for all this... Fram 05:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment In this situation that type of sourcing is adequate. We need not hold every type of subject content to identical standards. That is the reason that content is always decided on an individual basis, article by article, by groups of editors rather than rulings of the Arbitration Committee. If you carefully read our policies and guidelines related to content, you will note that sources written by individuals or groups can be used for articles about the individual or group if there is good reason to think that they are true and are in fact a good source for the information. If we did not take this approach, we would not be able to fulfill our mission of collecting free, encyclopedic information on all possible topics. Many topics would not be covered adequately. Historically some groups were not covered by what we consider reliable sources today. Pioneers, historical women, U.S. slaves and other minority groups are examples of groups that are not adequately covered by traditional sources for varying reasons. Therefore documents such as letters, other historical documents, and well documented oral histories can be used if the information is not contentious. I hope this explanation helps explain why I support the inclusion of this article. Take care, FloNight 14:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment I agree with the above. Also, I would like to add an additional point to those listed above.  The fact remains that this is a new article and both minor and major events have yet to be filled in historical gaps.  An example would be that I only recently came across the birth, death, and cemetary records for both John Machemehl and Henrietta Borel Machemehl found at .  This is just one example.  Thank you for your consideration of these issues.  User:Bhaktivinode  29 March 2007


 * Thanks for replying, FloNight, but, well, I have a completely different understanding of our WP:ATT policy here, and I feel that this interpretation opens the door (or more precisley the floodgates) for almost every person willing to spend an hour writing something down to have an article on Wikipedia as long as they have a trustworthy looking source about themselves, no matter who writes or publishes it. The claim that we have no reliable sources for historical groups and figures and completely irrelevant and is plain wrong: we have no contemporary reliable sources, but there is no reason we can't have more recent reliable sources,and in fact we have such sources for every notable person (since that is exactly the definition of being notable of course. If those more recnt reliable sources are absent (as is the case here), then the person fails WP:BIO (which John Machemehl clearly does) and fails all but the most liberal interpretation of WP:ATT.Anyway, even accepting your interpretation of the use of self-published or questionable sources: this is the full extent of the sole source we have: Sometime between 1845 and 1850 John Machemehl, his father Michael and very young son Paul came to Texas from Germany. Their coming to the U.S. was part of the sizeable German migration which resulted from the unrest in the various German principalities in the revolutionary period of the 1830’s and 1840’s. John’s wife, Henrietta Borel, brought with them on the 10 week sailing voyage a china set which now is in storage at the Mohle Drive home of Helen and Marlin Bownds where my son Jonathan lives. John had a university education, was forester for the city of Annaberg in Saxony.  His wife Henrietta, born in Switzerland, was a French Huguenot who was a governess for the family of a Russian prince of Courland whose estate was on the Baltic.  She met John Machemehl in Saxony while traveling with the Russian Family.  Henrietta died in Texas in 1850.  John married two more times, had four more children, and died in 1880. Why would you want to have an article on this person, even if you would accept the source as good enough? What distinguishes him from thousands of other persons? The only thing that distinguishes him is that someone has put this info on his personal website... Fram 15:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment Fram if you bring this back to a debate on what distinguishes John Machemehl, you are returning to our early debate for speedy deletion, which was denied. These reasons are: These were a few of the items which distinguishes him. Thank you for your reply. User:Bhaktivinode 29 March 2007
 * He was a notable member of the German community of Annaberg as he was the city's forester.
 * He was a member of the Forty-Eighters.
 * He was an early German-Texan settler.
 * He provided leadership for the early German-Texan settlers.
 * He was the central figure in an historical German-Texan family.
 * He was the father of Paul Machemehl.


 * Comment. I completely agree with Fram. No matter how inadequately one may feel someone is covered by the chronicles, it doesn't expand licence to overlook Verifiability. WP as a tool to connect with reliable sources is diminished by accepting article material on this basis. How can this article get away with just claiming JM was the forrester of Annaberg, leader of men etc. A valid article will point me to trustworthy doccumentation of this. There's that, and additionally the genealogy flavour about this. M URGH   disc.  16:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment This article does need work. This is for certain.  It is only a few days old.  There is still new information to be filled in.  I have only been researching this for the past few days.  Today I found a reliable record for the Machemehl Cemmetary.  This link can be found at .  Also, I recently found that he recieved his American citizenship in 1856 at this site .  There is informatin concerning his father and sister at this link, and more on another sister here, .  Also for general archives conerning Johns involvement in the German Texan heritage of Bellville can be found at . These links helps fill some more information about these early German Texas settlers.  I will be adding more when I come across it - BUT, frankly I believe there is already enough information to substantiate and article entry.  Thanks again for your comments and review.  User:Bhaktivinode  29 March 2007


 * I am not bringing it back to a debate on notability, notability is just one of the aspects in this deletion debate. And an article that is not speedyable is by no means exempt from deletion through AfD: the requirements to delete something through speedy are much stricter, and it is enough that one editor (apart from the creator) disagrees to make the speedy impossible. For speedy, you need an article that does not assert notability. To survive AfD, you need to show that notability with verifiable, reputable, independent sources. I think this article fails on both accounts, since all the claims made are not enough to make someone notable (interesting, perhaps, but not notable), and those claims are not supported by verifiable, reputable, independent sources: all we can verify is that he lived and where and when he died: I have no trouble accepting that he was the father of Paul either. But I have seen no evidence that he "provided leadership" or was a "central figure" beyond being the father of one barely notable person and the grandfather of one notable person: notability is not transferable. Information on his family is irrelevant for this discussion: it may be interesting to add to the article if it is kept, but it plays no part in the decision to keep or delete it. Please check out WP:BIO and see for yourself how John Machemehl thoroughly fails this. Fram 19:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You start out saying you are not taking the debate back to notability, but your article above is centered on this question of yours alone. John Machemehl was an early German Texan settler.  That is enough.  He does not have to part any seas as Moses did.  I have shown above that there are many sources.  I strongly disagree with you and am confident that this is the beginnings of a sound article.  User:Bhaktivinode  29 March 2007

comment I have edited the article on John Machemehl, added soucrces and primarily - I have tried to place the disagrements over sources within context. If others are willing to assist, I would be more than appreciative. Thanks for review the above. User:Bhaktivinode 29 March 2007


 * Weak delete I think that being among the first European settlers in an area is potentially notable, depending on the historical circumstances, especially if the person is one of the leaders of the group. The problem is sources. The sources you are using are primary sources from which a biographical or genealogical account could be written. But if you were to do so--and it does look as if you are setting about it in a reasonable way--this would be the first time the material had ever been compiled, and would count as OR. I am not very restrictive about NOR--I think that assembling together obvious public sources into an article is legitimate. I believe that an article about a person based on a suitable secondary work but incorporating something from the primary public record is justifiable. But gathering a number of primary sources, checking the inscriptions of tombstones and on library collections of primary sources in unpublished genealogies and (in some other articles) prison records or social security records or deeds or immigration records, or the Sanford map series, --not here, but in other similar articles -- is OR, in the most basic sense. This is what local historians do. I'm not sure that there is yet as suitable wiki for the purpose, but there surely will be--and then we can discuss whether compilations there count as reliable secondary sources--I think it would depend on the standards of the Wiki. I might be prepared to accept such as site as the Wintermann library site as RS for the purpose if it gave sources (which it doesnt) --but not for this particular subject as he is only mentioned in a summary account of another family. So in conclusion, weak delete as probable OR.  DGG 23:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * We have no indication that he was "among the first European settlers in the area" though. Among the first German ones perhaps... Fram 05:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment Since information discerned from the Bownds Archives has at times been at the center of this debate, I have placed it, within the article, in sequence - as an afterthought. Please do judge the article in this new context, with a much reduced reliance upon this source. Thank you for considering these issues. User:Bhaktivinode 29 March 2007


 * I have added a series of edits to the article in order bring it into line with some of the criticisms leveled above. I now please ask for any responses concerning these recent edits, in this process, from people yet to be heard from, or those who have some constructive input.  Thanks you for reviewing these comments.  User:Bhaktivinode  29 March 2007

User:Merknorton 1 April 2007
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 06:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Machemehl Family House. The person is generally notable for a few things but lacks attribution in places, such as being a forester; the article reaches too far at present.  On the other hand, he and his father describe the beginning of the USA branch of the family tree in which contains Paul Machemehl, Louis A. Machemehl, Chuck Machemehl, and Charles W. Machemehl.  As a result various facts about the historical roots of this family will become attributable over time, and the Machemehl Family House article is the best spot for them to land on wiki. John Vandenberg 07:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve I agree with the above but only in part.  While I do think that the Machemehl Family House is a page that should mention John Machemehl, as a member of the Forty-Eighters  who led his family and companions from Annaberg to Austin County -  John Machemehl should have a page in his own right as such an early German Texan settler.  Right now, the article does need to improve more, but it has improved over the past few days, and I suspect it will continue to improve quite more over time.  Presently, I and am open to any and all constructive ideas.  Thank you for reviewing the above.  User:Bhaktivinode  30 March 2007
 * Keep relevant to German Texas history.
 * Comment This is the first contribution by user Merknorton. John Vandenberg 22:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Comment Because this debate has gone on for five days and the above parties, who have either commented, voted to keep or delete, have made their case in the comments above. Should this debate be closed? Thanks you for reviewing the above. User:Bhaktivinode 2 April 2007

very weak keep On a site brimming with commercial junk & pop culture fan noise, it's good to see actual historical data. I would prefer a merge to a deletion, but I pick keep by a thin edge. Ventifax 22:35, 2 April 2007 (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.