Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zdzisław Zakrzewski


 * 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. Tone 18:21, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Zdzisław Zakrzewski

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Created by SPA, deprodded by IP. Non-notable far right activist (lookup All-Polish Youth - and other orgs here). The article is sourced to obits in far right media. Very little coverage in reliable secondary sources. Full of puffery, this fails NSOLDIER, PROF (gScholar does not show many publications at all), and NPOL, and does not pass GNG.Icewhiz (talk) 19:27, 15 May 2019 (UTC) Icewhiz (talk) 19:27, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Also - 2 obits are by the same individual (and the third is a donor profile at the organization that employs him). The obits state he is the foster son of Zakrzewski and that his organization received donations from Zakrzewski.Icewhiz (talk) 20:16, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 19:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 19:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 19:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 19:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 19:30, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:01, 15 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as PROMO for a deceased political activist/ propagandist. I suppose the idea is to make his work seem legitimate. My searches do not find sources to support notability.  Also per WP:NOTMEMORIAL.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:05, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Best, GPL93 (talk) 03:10, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't think the goal is to promote some obscure (1996) book. I think the main argument for keeping is on the basis of him being the recipient of Order of Polonia Restituta, but the claim was unferenced (not even present in the Polish version of this article; but I did find a ref for it: ). PR is the third highest Polish state decoration (second highest for civilians): Orders, decorations, and medals of Poland and imho sufficient grounds for passing WP:ANYBIO#1. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  04:05, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Even then not sure it passes WP:ANYBIO #1 in terms of state orders and decorations. Only the highest honor, for instance the Presidential Medal of Freedom (civilian) and the Medal of Honor (military) in the US, meet inclusionary standards. Best, GPL93 (talk) 04:19, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * What is your source for saying that? ANYBIO just states "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times.". It doesn't state that only the highest national honor is sufficient, and IMHO the few highest ones should be, for most countries at least. I will note that this is true for military ones per WikiProject_Military_history/Notability_guide, but civilian world is bigger than military, and we should make allowances for that.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:58, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Polish ribbons (low and mid rank as this one) are handed out in large quantities and are not an indication of notability, coverage, or merit. A donation of a few hundred thousand dollars to Polish causes is sufficient for a decoration. Our subject is described in the obits (written or connected to his foster son) as a donor to Polish causes - this is not a basis for notability.Icewhiz (talk) 05:37, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your disparaging opinion on "Polish ribbons". I have yet to hear that someone got a Polonia Restituta medal for 'bribing' the government. There are statistics for PR available on pl:Order Odrodzenia Polski, the first 2-3 classes of it are clearly not handed by the bucket. There are about 10-20 people who are awarded PR 2nd class each year, and that seems reasonably limited to me. I'd agree that the 4th and 5th classes, which seem to be hundreds to over thousands of recipients, are less significant, with the 3rd class and 100-200 recipients a year probably being borderline. In any case, this person has received PR 2nd class and IMHO being in a group of 10-20 people a year who receive this honor is sufficient for ANYBIO. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:58, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * To be clear - I did not say bribing the government - these are handed out to donors to good social causes (or what is deemed as a good cause) - e.g. in our particular case our subject donated (and in those days - the US dollar went a much longer way in Poland) to charitable causes in post-1989 Poland as well as bringing Polish emigrees from Kazakhstan back to Poland. Per pl:Order Odrodzenia Polski - you are talking about around 50,000 Polonia Restituta awards since 1990, of which around 1,000 are 1s and 2nd class (our subject - 2nd). And we should remember that PR ranks below - Order of the White Eagle (Poland) - which per plwiki - has 234 decorations from 1990. White Eagle might qualify for ANYBIO - but Order of Polonia Restituta definitely not. Icewhiz (talk) 10:33, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Adding on to what Icewhiz said its pretty consistent across national honor systems that receiving any ribbon or order is not an automatic WP:ANYBIO pass, although many recipients of highest orders already pass WP:GNG or another notability standard. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:04, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Since there are no specific guidelines, we have to use our editorial judgement on whether an award is sufficient or not. As I explained above, I draw a line at PR 2nd class, with 3rd class being borderline, and 4th and below being not sufficient. And out of curiousity, if you think that White Eagle, the top Polish award/order, just "might" qualify, is there ANY Polish state award you think would suffice for ANYBIO? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:21, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I probably wouldn't argue over White Eagle (even though it is far less selective than the Presidential Medal of Freedom in terms of number of awards per year) and for SOLDIER - Virtuti Militari probably above some rank (stats - plwiki - again far less selective than Medal of Honor, a bit similar to Legion of Honour perhaps in selectivity and multiple grades - see MilHist discussion on this). I would also note that for modern recipients (e.g. our subject) - you'd expect them to meet GNG anyway. Icewhiz (talk) 07:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Seems to fulfill all notability criteria, including being awarded very notable Order of Polonia Restituta.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 16:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Care to expand on which criteria he meets? As the discussion above highlights, receiving the Order of Polonia Restituta is not exactly an automatic notability pass. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes our notability criteria, and yes receiving the Order of Polonia Restituta is an automatic notability pass. - Darwinek (talk) 17:03, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Not close to the usual standard in ANYBIO#1 - to put this in perspective - there are approx. 49,000 recipients from 1990-2019. There are an additional 681,949 recipients under PRL in 1944-1990 (see ) - that's 730 thousand. Add to that government in exile awards (recognized today, and awarded through 1990 in parallel to PRL) - I'm unsure of numbers - and awards from 1921-1939 - all told - quite possibly exceeding 1 million awardees. Icewhiz (talk) 17:13, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * "Not close to the usual standard in ANYBIO#1". What are the usual standards in ANYBIO#1? I don't see anything about this in Articles for deletion/Common outcomes. I would be very happy if we could add a proper interpretation of ANYBIO#1 to Wikipedia rules, but right now I'll say we clearly have NO CONSENSUS for where to draw the line between sufficient and insufficient awards for notability. So please don't say that this doesn't meet our standards. It doesn't meet yours, but it meets mine. That's a definition of lack of agreement, not of you being right. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * A national award that has been awarded to 49,000 individuals since 1990 CANNOT be so significant that it automatically confers notability. IT JUST CAN'T.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)  (Corrected, my notoriously poor keyboard skills.  sigh.) E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:06, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * - since 1990, not 1900. Icewhiz (talk) 17:04, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * It should be noted that most national honors, such as the Order of the British Empire which is awarded at a lower frequency, are not automatic notability passes. Best, GPL93 (talk) 23:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * You may want to research thing a bit before trusting claims made here. OPR has been established in 1921, not 1990. Since 1990, the 2nd Class (discussed here) has been awarded to 762 individuals; 1st class to 219 (stats from pl wiki article). The number for ~50,000 awards since 1990 is for all classes up to the 5th. As I said above, I think that the 1st and 2nd classes are pretty selective based on the numbers. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment. Note that for the UK we consider the CBE or above to be high enough for automatic notability per ANYBIO. That's about 100 or so people every year who are considered notable enough due to their state honours. Seems a little lower than this one. However, given he was awarded the second highest grade of the order he may well be notable. But we should certainly not consider every recipient of the order, even at the lower levels, notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note the almost complete lack of sourcing for this biography. There are grand claims: "In 1949, he moved to the United States and began working in the national defense sector, including on such projects as the hydrogen bomb and spy satellites;"  "Zakrzewski held many patents and wrote numerous scholarly articles on engineering."  "He ran the All-Polish Youth organization in the UK.", "Zakrzewski twice organized aviator mutinies: first, in August 1944, to protest.." and many similarly grand claims. With NO SOURCES.  I find it extremely puzzling that we are discussing a man who lived n the U.S. from 1949 forward, and who claims to have founded, funded, staffed, been head of, or active in everything from the Polish American Federal Credit Union to the Strategic Defense Initiative - and yet NONE of this is sourced.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:59, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
 * There are some sources, through in Polish:, . All however authored by a relative (also a somewhat controversial professor). So there's a bit of COI here, but he nonetheless is a scholar and did publish this obit in a few places (through they are not particularly high profile). I agree that there is lack of coverage; in essence it is really the question of whether ANYBIO is passed or not due to that single award. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: The concern is lack of referencing, so any awards won are irrelevant. Arguments to keep should directly address availability of sufficient source material.
 * Delete, no sources equals no notability. As for the award he allegedly received: first, even that bare fact is not reliably sourced; second, awards are only "significant" in the sense of Wikipedia notability if their bestowal on an individual regularly triggers extensive coverage of that individual in reliable sources. If that can't be assumed to happen for this particular award – and it apparently didn't happen with this person – then the award is of no relevance to us. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:10, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * What do you mean that fact is not reliably sourced? Are governmental websites not reliable? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  08:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, hadn't seen it was a government website, it looked like some random obituary to me. My second point stands. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:13, 23 May 2019 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, Per Fut.Perf.-- PRDM_&#95;9 (talk) 14:15, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   07:38, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep The sourcing on the article is dismal. But if the subject accomplished everything that the article said he did, then I would hope some of our Polish-fluent editors can take the time and bring this piece up to speed with proper sourcing. As it stands, I am not convinced that deleting the article is in the best interest of this website. Capt. Milokan (talk) 18:30, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note subject lived in the USA for most of his life - 1949 to 2013. Some of what the article currently describes is possibly false or exaggerated - it is not reliably sourced. In terms of patents and academic papers - the claims in the article do match up with what I found searching (scholar, patent db - note there is another individual with same name (different age, field))Icewhiz (talk) 18:35, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Whole sections filled with daring-do worthy of a Hollywood thriller and feats of scientific legerdemain in improbably disparate fields of research are entirely without sources - despite heroic efforts by Polish speaking editors commenting above to source this page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:27, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, what's stopping you from editing out the material that is not properly sourced? Action always speaks better than words. Capt. Milokan (talk) 00:52, 31 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete: We need RSs so that notability can be established. No RSs, no notability. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 21:17, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: No hope of meeting WP:SOLDIER & fails WP:BASIC for lack of RS.--K.e.coffman (talk) 01:01, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I looked into Google Scholar (to see if he might be notable as an academic). The lead states that he is an optical engineer, fyi. Either way, I found none in that field.--Biografer (talk) 02:15, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment, this looks like it was copied from the Polish WP see here that has the same lack of references, if kept will need a translate tag. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:31, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment, i agree with that as a recipient of the Order of Polonia Restituta 2nd class Zakrzewski meets WP:ANYBIO as having received "a well-known and significant award or honor", i am, however, uncomfortable with the amount of unsourced information in the article, remove it all and we are down to about 4 lines, yes i do know that WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP but as "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included. " (my underlining) i am staying on the fence. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:09, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think there are red flags here, and I think most if not all of the unsourced content could be sourced to one of the external links or links I provided here (his obituary bios). So you may want to consider casting an actual vote, not just comment, particularly given that the article is templated enough to make it clear it needs a copyedit :> --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:09, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The obits are not independent of the subject (foster son), and they were published in non-reliable sources - e.g. Najwyższy Czas! is associated with a fringe political party in Poland has frequently published pieces by a Holocaust denier. Per the SPLC - "the weekly Najwyzszy Czas! (The Time is Now!). That's the magazine of the Real Politics Union party, a fringe, pro-life, anti-gay marriage, pro-property rights, anti-income tax group. It often uses anti-Semitic stereotypes on its pages, according to a Tel Aviv University global "Anti-Semitism Survey.". Icewhiz (talk) 06:25, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I concur re source and re author, but the obit itself is not particularly anti-anything, is it? --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:34, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete - The article is almost certainly a copy-paste of a translation of his wpolityce.pl obituary. Also, he was a significant funder of the IWP, where his foster son, Marek Jan Chodakiewicz is a member of the faculty. As such, his IWP obituary ought to be fairly accurate. That obit doesn't seem to suggest a high degree of encyclopedic-ness. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:23, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete For someone who lived in the U.S. since 1949 my search found a lack of coverage in English for someone who supposedly wrote many articles and received patents. Google Scholar does not support a claim of notability.  I don't see that any SNG or WP:GNG is met. Papaursa (talk) 02:27, 5 June 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.