Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilhelm Busch (priest)


 * 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 speedy keep (non-admin closure, nominator withdrew). StAnselm (talk) 23:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Wilhelm Busch (priest)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No independent reliable sources included to establish notability per GNG, and I'm unable to turn up any via searching. The one source provided is a link to the author's own book, which, despite the article's claim as his "most well known work", appears to have received little coverage itself. &mdash; Jess &middot; &Delta;&hearts; 22:54, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 *  Provisional keep. While there is only one source cited, there are six sources in the bibliography, all of which appear to mention the subject in their titles. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Changed to "Keep" based on further looking at the sources and on Han Adler's comment below. Six apparently reliable sources about the subject are sufficient to ward off deletion. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:38, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per reliable sources in bibliography. Strongly recommend that inline cites be added ASAP before someone starts deleting content.– Lionel (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I can't read any of the sources in the bibliography, and there are no online versions - all I can see is that they may use the subject's name. I assume based on your assessment that you are familiar with these works. Can you read German? Can you verify whether the books make notable mention of the subject, and if they do, what mention it is? Thanks.  &mdash; Jess &middot; &Delta;&hearts; 01:34, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Sources are neither required to be online nor to be in English. Jclemens (talk) 01:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, quite obviously, but they are required to actually be proper sources, which is why I asked if any editor could verify that they do, indeed, establish notability for the subject. I'm willing to withdraw the nomination if they do. However, as it stands, none of the content in the entire article is sourced to anything, and we have a handful of books listed in the bibliography that no one has yet said they could read or vouch for. AFAIK, they could be a passing mention, or self published, or about a separate topic altogether. Assuming notability just because we have a couple effectively illegible books cited without even being used as refs seems a bit too eager for me to jump on board.  &mdash; Jess &middot; &Delta;&hearts; 16:56, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. There are obviously multiple works about the subject. The nomination seems to be based on a misinterpretation of WP:NOENG. StAnselm (talk) 02:46, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. The German version of the article has extensive references. Apart from the man's large bibliography itself (which of course doesn't help to establish notability), it has six reliable sources about him. They are all in pietist publications or from pietist publishers, but pietism isn't sufficiently fringe in Germany to warrant discounting them on that account. He also made it into a (fairly indiscriminate, apparently) printed reference work, the Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon. Altogether I would say this is somewhere between an obvious keep and a borderline case. Hans Adler 09:20, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Hans. I tend to agree with your assessment, but I'm still a little on the edge since no one has directly vouched for these books. Are you able to read German, and confirm that these works are (as you say) reliable and about him? Thanks.  &mdash; Jess &middot; &Delta;&hearts; 16:56, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * They appear to be all publishers of Christian books. You can look up their web sites online. I see no evidence that any of them are vanity-presses for self-published authors (for the source published in 1973, it's unlikely to be self-published). At least one of the publishers seems reputable/notable: Hansisches Druck und Verlagshaus.
 * Also, note that lacking inline references is not a valid deletion rationale. The fact that the references exist, regardless of whether they exist in the article, is a valid reason to keep it, however. In this case we have a bibliography that lists books explicitly devoted to the subject of the article, not merely books that mention him. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:38, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe the Q "are you able to read German" to someone who has at user page German indicated as mother tongue comes a bit odd.--Stephfo (talk) 12:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I am pretty sure that I can smell self-published sources and similar problems pretty accurately. In this case, I am vaguely familiar with the religious movement from which this comes (it's very strong in my region of origin), and it all looks incredibly plausible. Besides, this guy didn't even have much of a chance not to become technically notable given his life. He was president of the German YMCA from 1936 till 1950, i.e. over most of the Nazi era as well as in 5 post-war years. As a surviving prominent member of the (basically anti-nazi) Confessing Church (Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Martin Niemöller were better-known members), he must have been a welcome role model for German Protestants after the war. And he was involved in several parties after the war as well. Another indication that everything is fine is that the German Wikipedia has a link to a site that has more than 600 of his sermons online as audio files, mostly recorded in the 1960s. This guy must have been incredibly popular in his circles, which as I said cannot be considered fringe. Hans Adler 13:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Eh... not a direct answer to my question, which is my only remaining hangup. Still, I accept that I don't have any knowledge of the topic, and those who do seem to think the subject is notable, so I'm willing to defer to their judgement. It's concerning to me, however, that we're presuming notability despite no one having read anything being cited... It would also be nice to have something (anything) sourced in the article, but that itself is not a rationale for deletion. I'll withdraw my nomination. Moving forward, if someone able to read German could skim the bibliography and add a few of the (presumably reliable and relevant) books as cites (even just for his name and birthdate), that would be helpful. Thanks.  &mdash; Jess &middot; &Delta;&hearts; 17:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't understand what more direct answer you want. I think it's perfectly obvious that I am a native speaker of German. As to your other concern about the sources, I am definitely not going to check them out from a library to satisfy you. I am not interested in pietists, and I am currently living in Vienna, where I would be very unlikely to get them anyway since the extremely thorough Austrian counter-reformation made sure that there are practically no Protestants here nowadays.
 * It's hard to find information about that guy online because he wasn't that notable after all, because all mainstream media references must have been long before digital media were invented (and Germany is extremely slow with digitisation of newspapers), and also because he has the same name as an incredibly popular author.
 * Besides, a Speedy A7 (no claim of notability) on an article whose infobox said "Known for resistance against totalitarian Nazi regime, Evangelizations for youth, literary works" was a mistake anyway, and we don't set a higher standard for an article just because an erroneous speedy was declined. Hans Adler 18:28, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I didn't mean any offense, Hans. I was hoping you'd be able to confirm that the book titles at least indicated they were about him. Part of my concern is that the books aren't accessible to any editor here, so no one is able to confirm their contents. Quite obviously, I understand that's not your fault, or any such nonsense, I'm just concerned we're presuming notability despite not having any accessible sources. That was a general comment, not specifically directed at you. I'm not sure where you got the impression that I felt a higher standard should be set due to a declined CSD - obviously that would be absurd. As I said above, I'm okay with deferring to your judgement, since you know more about the topic than I do, which I intend to mean that I now believe the article should be kept. That doesn't mean I don't still have reservations, but again, those reservations aren't your problem, any more than any other editor here.  &mdash; Jess &middot; &Delta;&hearts; 18:43, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the mind reading, which apparently went wrong. Now that you have clarified what you actually wanted to know: Yes, it's perfectly obvious from the book titles that they are about him. Hans Adler 19:36, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Awesome. Thanks :)  &mdash; Jess &middot; &Delta;&hearts; 20:18, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Jess, I wonder if you read the article at all, to state "Moving forward, if someone able to read German could skim the bibliography and add a few of the (presumably reliable and relevant) books as cites (even just for his name and birthdate), that would be helpful." after clicking on just the 2nd reference as well as harping on your other points related to online accessibility of data should not IMHO be possible, even if you have no notion about German language.
 * Hans, I've found the information on "He was president of the German YMCA from 1936 till 1950, i.e. over most of the Nazi era as well as in 5 post-war years." for interesting to be added into the article, is there any source available for it? Thanx.--Stephfo (talk) 03:39, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I've managed to find myself: BEKANNTE MITGLIEDER DER CVJM/YMCA BEWEGUNG INTERNATIONAL. Thanx.--Stephfo (talk) 03:49, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Stephfo, there's not much reason to keep posting here instead of the talk page. However, keep in mind the article was very substantially different when this AfD was proposed, and indeed when I made that comment. At that time, the second reference to which you refer didn't exist.  &mdash; Jess &middot; &Delta;&hearts; 03:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for posting here again, but it seems necessary because I made an important mistake above. He was never president of the CVJM (German YMCA). I misunderstood a complicated sentence in my hasty reading of the German Wikipedia article. Putting this here in case it makes you change your mind and to ensure that this misinformation doesn't make it into our article later on when an editor reads this page. Hans Adler 08:59, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Nomination without any merit. Notability was clear even at the time when Jess added the speedy nomination tag. --Hegvald (talk) 12:49, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * It would appear that the article has been moved by Stepho but not it's history, I'm not sure how to fix this?Theroadislong (talk) 12:21, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Stepho moved the text to Wilhelm Busch (pastor). I have restored the text of the original article and moved it (properly) to Wilhelm Busch (clergyman), which may be a more appropriate title. Wilhelm Busch (pastor) has been turned into a redirect. --Hegvald (talk) 12:49, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Enough coverage of this person found to indicate notability.  D r e a m Focus  23:49, 20 November 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.