Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Otto Schröder


 * 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 redirect to Germany at the 1936 Summer Olympics. with the history under the redirect if enough sourcing is found to substantiate a standalone article. At the moment, consensus is against one existing. Star  Mississippi  01:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Otto Schröder

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

Schroder was a non-medaling Olympic competitor. In fact he was eliminated in the first round. The sourcing here is just a sports table. It looks like the German version of Wikipedia has some more sports table entries on him. I was able to learn there is another Otto Schroder who is a contemporary painter/visual artist, who I believe is from Namibia, who may be notable, and I found a novel where a character was named Otto Schroder, and an Otto F. Schroder who shows up in the report of a congressional hearing, but no sources to pass GNG for this Otto Shhroder, and based on these other finding of the name there is no reason to suppose someone looking for this name would want to find an article on this person, so there is no reason to have a redirect. John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG, is likely to remain as a permastub.  ~XyNq tc 13:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * His German wiki article states he was a top-ten finisher in multiple national tournaments, and was a member of the SS. I guess there should be some coverage of this guy somewhere. In lieu of anything being uncovered, then redirect to Germany at the 1936 Summer Olympics per WP:ATD, WP:PRESERVE, WP:R and WP:CHEAP.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 14:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * In 1944 alone the SS had 800,000 employees. Being part of the SS is not even remotely a sign of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Not in itself, but it could hint towards further coverage...  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 16:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Unless you have something further to cough up as the creator of this article and many others like it, the argument that "it could hint towards further coverage" isn't useful, especially since this article falls under things like WP:2S, WP:BIO1E, and it doesn't even meet WP:NOLYMPIC. The stat padding you do by making these Olympic articles is not aligned with the objective of Wikipedia, yet you proudly link milestone articles on your userpage that violate the same guidelines as this article.  ~XyNq tc 20:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm a bit sick of these sort of nominations, to be honest. There's an over-reliance on GNG, and a misunderstanding of what notability means. We presume notability with GNG, but we can presume it in other means. In this case - a German Olympian in 1936 - it's pretty obvious that there will have been a lot written about him, but it's all in German and offline and nobody is particularly interested in putting it online because it's Nazi. StAnselm (talk) 16:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * No we have explicitly decided that being an Olympian is not a presumption of notability at all. Only medaling is a presumption of notability. Verrifiability means we must have sources to have an article, not just an argument that sources exist somewhere. We have specfically decided we do not presume the notability of all olympic competitors.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:22, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not presuming his notability because he's an Olympian. I'm presuming his notability because he's a German Olympian at the 1936 Olympics. StAnselm (talk) 20:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment: I note that every single other competitor in both events (Fencing at the 1936 Summer Olympics – Men's épée and Fencing at the 1936 Summer Olympics – Men's team épée) is blue-linked. Which makes me wonder, why this nomination? Is there something else going on? StAnselm (talk) 16:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:OLYMPICS seems to have a record of creating low-importance stub articles for any participants in an Olympic event because of WP:NOLYMPIC. Their page lists they have 116,000 low-importance stubs, which is 71% of their total pages in article mainspace.  ~XyNq tc 17:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Most if not all of those other articles are low quality, not backed by reliable sources articles turned out by the same editor in a mass creation campaign with often less than 2 minutes devoted to creating each article, a mass creation campaign that became so disruptive to Wikipedia that that editor was banned from creating any more stub articles. Also before October 2021 there was a presumption that all Olympains were notable, after a long discussion it was decided that instead only medalists were notable. A few editors have been working to remove the huge amount of no longer supported articles since then, but it is gruelling work where you have to do deep database dives on each and every person, since some people are actually notable for other things, but you have no clue when you start because the banned editor was myopically focused only on Olympic matters and did not mention anything else about the lives of these people. Bundled nominations can at times fail just because they are bundled, so they are not involved. I have been going systematically back through every entry in the birth year categories starting in 1927. My main goal is moving the about 100 or so entries in each birth year category that are in the wrong one, but I do other edits as well. I am because of an extremlely old edit restirction (I think it was imposed in 2016), limited to only nominating 1 article a day for deletion. So basically I plow back because my main goal is to but articles in the right birth year category (I am now back to the 1901 birth year category), and I basically nominate whatever article I come across when I hit about 24 hours since I last nominated an article. That is what is going on. There is no other reason than that.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Germany_at_the_1936_Summer_Olympics. We don't even have a particularly good source for the dates of birth and death. (I believe the date of birth, it is consistent with some SS lists I found, but the German Wikipedia doesn't even have a date of death). The name "Otto Schröder" is unfortunately quite common; there is another SS man (a physician) of the same name, but born in 1903. What I can find is fairly a trivial mention here (Heydrich gave him a Gestapo job in Berlin and allowed him to prepare for the Olympic games) and this cite from a book makes it looks as if he was doing SS/Gestapo/police work in Chrudim during the war (but I can't quite prove this is the same person). No significant coverage, just a few scattered one-sentence mentions. If we don't have anything detailed to say other than "was at the Olympics in 1936" then we should redirect. —Kusma (talk) 09:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is the sort of sports article that was allowed under the too-easy SNG that has been recently trashed. We need these nominations, where there is zero evidence of notability rather than attacking Asian major leaguers and others where common sense and a dash of BEFORE should provide a great clue that the sources are out there somewhere. There should be plenty more like this one! Jacona (talk) 12:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This one stems from the narrowing of the Olympian guideline in October 2021. It is not related to the more recent revisions related to sports notability in 2022. At least not directly.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:33, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * At the very worst this is a redirect to Germany at the 1936 Summer Olympics. Given that he was a member of the SS pre-war (not in 1944, but by 1937 at the latest) and clearly a prominent fencer in Germany in that period, there's an excellent chance that German language offline sources exist. Given that presumption, there's clearly a valid case to suggest keeping here as well. What I'm not convinced of at all is an argument for delating, with the loss of page history and so on. Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * the page history is really nothing but the one database entry. Jacona (talk) 16:49, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete; oppose redirect. Lack of significant coverage means this fails GNG. This should not be redirected because other people named Otto Schröder undoubtedly exist who are probably more notable than this one – per de:Otto Schröder there are at least three. wjematherplease leave a message... 10:44, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per Wjemather. Other Fencing at the 1936 Summer Olympics – Men's épée competitors with mass-produced one-liners should probably all be redirected; substantive coverage is expected. Reywas92Talk 14:16, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per Wjemather. No indication of notability. Nigej (talk) 05:10, 1 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.