Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karl Jordan (gymnast)


 * 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. I do not see a settled consensus on where the article should be moved to, but that discussion may be taken up on the article talk page. Stifle (talk) 15:58, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Karl Jordan (gymnast)

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

Prodded with the justification Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTSCRIT #5. Redirect is not suitable per WP:R #1, as there are multiple valid targets (Gymnastics_at_the_1912_Summer_Olympics_–_Men%27s_team, List of Olympic male artistic gymnasts for Germany, Germany men's national artistic gymnastics team, and as we cannot assume which one the reader is looking for the search function is more effective.

Prod removed by Lugnuts, without an edit summary or the addition of sources. BilledMammal (talk) 00:19, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. BilledMammal (talk) 00:19, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 07:42, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

 Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 10:25, 11 June 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Incorrect, I added a source about him also being a professor of zoology, with six species of heteroptera named after him.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 10:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep More about him and his insect-related antics can be found here, , , , , etc. I suspect someone who can speak/read German would unearth (chuckle) more about him too.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 12:05, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You added content from an existing source, not a new source.
 * Regarding the coverage you found, it appears only the second counts towards WP:GNG; the first is from the same source as they second, and might not be independent of the subject. The third I cannot access; can you provide an extract of the relevant content? The fourth is a passing mention, and the fifth is a database entry. BilledMammal (talk) 13:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete even with the additional sources we do not have multiple instances of significant coverage from indepdent, reliable secondary sources that we need to justify an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Assuming they're definitely the same person, keep, as in his professorial capacity he meets academic notability. This is going to need some untangling because of course Karl Jordan was also an entomologist, so we need to make sure we're always looking at the correct sources. If it turns out that Jordan-gymnast is notable as a professor rather than a gymnast, then we ought to move this article to a better name, but it has to distinguish between him and the other Jordan-entomologist. Elemimele (talk) 12:16, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The birth/death dates match the ones on the Olympedia source, but Olympedia isn't always the most reliable source - I note that the article Lugnuts found on his life and works makes no mention of gymnastics or the Olympics, despite providing a general overview of that period of his life, including mentioning his military service in 1909/1910. They might be the same person, but I would prefer a more reliable source than Olympedia to support that. However, the larger issue is that currently WP:GNG isn't met - if they are the same person, then we only have one source that counts towards GNG, not the multiple that we need. BilledMammal (talk) 12:24, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * has found two good sources, the obituary (1972) and the piece by Klausnitzer written in 2014. The criteria we need to consider are WP:NACADEMIC. Criterion 1 is whether their work has had significant impact in their discipline. Having 5 species named after him, and being remembered sufficiently to get an article like the Klausnitzer piece written 42 years after his death indicates lasting significance. This is not considering his own publications, which can only strengthen the case. He also had a special edition of a journal ("Beitraeger zur Entomologie") dedicated to him on his 65th birthday, which is an honour that counts towards criterion 2. His directorship at Tharandt is probably near to C5 (or C6) given that named professorships weren't really a thing at his time and place. These are all debatable, but I'd argue that three borderlines adds up to a definite, especially given that we're judging a historical figure by modern measures. The bottom line is that there is no doubt we can write about him accurately - we have independent and reliable information - so our choice is whether Wikipedia is weaker or stronger for including him. This AfD has strayed a very long way from a barely-known gymnast from the mists of time, about whom nothing could be written. I would argue that Wikipedia would be much the weaker for excluding him. I will try to find time to add some information from the Klausnitzer ref., which contains a lot of detail. I agree with you about the Olympedia thing; I'd feel a lot happier if one of his academic biographies had thought to mention his gymnastics. Elemimele (talk) 17:18, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Rereading the sources, I see that I made a mistake; the first source is from a different publication that the second. If we can verify that they are the same people, then I would withdraw my nomination; if we cannot, however, then we should delete the article on the gymnast and create one on the epidemiologist. BilledMammal (talk) 00:49, 19 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Looks like the same person to me. Both Olympedia and the PDF sources have his full name of "Karl Hermann Christian Jordan", with Olympedia's DOB/DOD matching the second PDF source too. If it helps, I can do a ton more insect-related puns...  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 08:17, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Question is do we trust Olympedia not to have messed up and conflated two people, attaching a professor's birthday to a barely-known gymnast? For the moment, I'm going to go and add some professorial information to the article on the assumption that they are the same person, and on the basis that the professor is in any case probably notable. I think that is basically right about the options. We should, in any case, move the article to a better name, since his notability turns out not to be connected to his gymnastics. Then, if they turn out to be different people, we can simply delete all reference to the gymnastics and we've got an article on an entomologist instead, a sort of legal hijacking. Elemimele (talk) 08:29, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I see no reason to doubt the source. It has detail on when and where he studied, as well as the zoology bit of his life. The site is run and updated by a Olympic historians and statisticians, with many of them being members of the International Society of Olympic Historians.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 09:55, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The question is what their source is; did they find a Karl Jordan who was around the same age and lived in around the same area and assumed he was the correct Karl Jordan, or did they find a source that either directly connected the two together? The fact that neither his obituary nor the article covering his life and work mention his participation in the Olympics makes me concerned that it is the former. BilledMammal (talk) 10:18, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * We should absolutely be requiring a corroborating reliable source, or at least the original source materials, in cases such as these. From experience looking through 1900 equestrian competitors, it's clear that some Olympedia contributors make huge leaps of faith when it comes to identifying early Olympians; these leaps are incorrect too often for comfort. wjematherplease leave a message... 13:20, 19 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I've asked for futher input, but I see no reason wht they would have "assumed he was the correct Karl Jordan".  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 10:27, 19 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep As stated, coverage of this individual satisfies WP:N. Our job as editors is to report what the sources say; unless there is a conflicting source that states that they are not the same person, it is not our job to speculate. That's original research, as are claims like "it's clear that some Olympedia contributors make huge leaps of faith when it comes to identifying early Olympians". The New York Times issues corrections to its articles all the time, but we would never ask if the New York Times "got it right" in a deletion discussion and get them to show their work (unless there was a specific issue documented at WP:RSP). If there are questions about whether or not Olympedia is a reliable source, then those belong on the reliable source noticeboard, not here. Canadian   Paul  20:35, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you able to identify the underlying references in this case? We don't need to go to WP:RSN to understand there are issues with Olympedia; it is a user-generated source, and individual articles do not identify the author or authors so we are not able to identify whether they are a subject matter expert. In addition, as Wjemather says, there have been issues in past; we cannot treat this source differently from other user-generated sources. BilledMammal (talk) 23:44, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but you are incorrect. Our job as editors is to always assess the reliability of sources on a case-by-case basis; as you note, even reliable sources can be unreliable at times. OR (a policy that only applies to content, not discussions) and WP:V do not require accepting sources (however reliable they are perceived to be) without question. As to the case at hand... we should all be demanding a confirmatory source when the only source we have is known to have made many identification errors for this era. wjematherplease leave a message... 09:37, 20 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I wonder if so much effort and disagreement to question a source would be made in other AfDs.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 11:02, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If similar doubts were cast on the identification of the subject as possibly being two different individuals, then I'm sure it would. If correct, we really shouldn't have any problem cross-referencing such details with multiple reliable sources. If we cannot, then it throws up a red flag that should not be ignored or dismissed on blind faith. wjematherplease leave a message... 11:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep and move to an appropriate zoology related disambiguation. Seems clear the zoologist meets inclusion standards. It is less clear if he is the same person as the gymnast. That issue can be discussed further on the talk page (if kept), and the resultant redirect from the current title targeted elsewhere if this link cannot be substantiated. wjematherplease leave a message... 11:37, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep and move, with "zoologist" as the suggested dab. The professor is notable and time will tell whether the professor is in fact the gymnast.  Schwede 66  00:27, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Practical difficulty is how to disambiguate. The other Karl Jordan was also an entomologist! They had different initials, at any rate. Elemimele (talk) 05:58, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest the Karl Jordan be moved to Karl Jordan (zoologist, born 1861); make Karl Jordan a disambiguation page; and move this article to Karl Jordan (zoologist, born 1888). wjematherplease leave a message... 09:24, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd also support moving Karl Jordan to be a DAB page with the individuals disambiguated as above, as the individual currently at Karl Jordan isn't exactly extraordinarily notable to occupy the primary topic, especially if the consensus is that we have two notable zoologists with the same name. Bungle (talk • contribs) 09:24, 25 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep and move per above.4meter4 (talk) 15:21, 27 June 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.