Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siegfried Karfunkelstein

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 no consensus. Clearly, there's no agreement here as to whether the sources provided by User:Aymatth2 are sufficient to push this person past the general notability guideline. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Siegfried Karfunkelstein

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not sure about notability - I don't think the Iron Cross 2nd class is notable enough to merit an article Gbawden (talk) 11:29, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak Delete~~ Notability does not seem to be established as yet. The Jewish Encyclopedia reference comes from the German book "Jews as Soldiers", I don't have access to that source but if the coverage is significant that would flip my vote instantly. SPACKlick (talk) 12:01, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edited as having seen the original work and a couple of other mentions this appears not to meet General or Military notability guidelines.SPACKlick (talk) 07:26, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edited again, change vote, following the below discussion SPACKlick (talk) 13:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as copyvio of [1].TheLongTone (talk) 12:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Not a copyvio, the Jewish Encyclopedia is in the public domain, whatever Jewishencyclopedia.com would like you to think. הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 14:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The Iron Cross 2nd Class is certainly not enough for notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:10, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I see no evidence of WP:NOTABILITY. --Jersey92 (talk) 14:13, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Here is the original entry in Juden als Soldaten (also available on Google Books[2] as part of Die Juden in Deutschland). I do not understand why the Jewish Encyclopedia, whose standards for inclusion seem to have been higher than Wikipedia's, felt that Karfunkelstein merited an article. הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 14:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Further comment: The significance of Karfunkelstein, as can be seen by reading the surrounding text in the sources, is that he was a Jewish war hero, and was thus mentioned in several works trying to counter antisemitism, though the same sources include many others, and Karfunkelstein is not particularly remarkable among them. הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 19:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:SOLDIER, unless the Iron Cross, 2nd class, was much, much more significant back then. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesn't meet GNG or SOLDIER. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:22, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Clearly notable. Various sources discuss the subject

Other books give passing mentions, as do various websites. E.g. his name in on a Silesian war memorial. The online sources alone are easily enough to show GNG notability. A search would have been in order before nominating for deletion. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Aymatth2.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:39, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Aymatth2's sources, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:03, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With the availability of the encyclopedic sources identified above, it appears that notability is established. Alansohn (talk) 22:04, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per sources provided by Ayamatth2. -- KRIMUK90 ✉ 07:49, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Aymatth2 Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Even though he is mentioned in sources, he is still not notable. Notice that even the general he gave the flag to, Budrisky, is redlinked, and that is a general, not a simple soldier. Debresser (talk) 13:57, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I personally have difficulty seeing baseball players as notable. They are certainly less heroic than this guy. But they are notable in the Wikipedia sense. If a number of sources cover a subject in some detail then it is by definition notable. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: None of the sources mentioned really have significant coverage. Most of the works cited above are lists of Jewish soldiers, with half a page devoted to each—why does such minor coverage count toward notability? הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 17:07, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If several printed books give mini-bios of the subject, that is enough to justify Wikipedia giving a mini-bio too. We have no shortage of space. I do not see anything offensive or discreditable or any other reason to remove the article. Am I missing something? Aymatth2 (talk) 18:01, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is your understanding of significant coverage? I take it to mean that an article should be based on sources that say more than "he existed, he died". הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 18:10, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Jewish Encyclopedia entry copied in the article says much more than "he existed, he died". Die Juden in Deutschland gives more detail again. Other sources describe his final act of conspicuous bravery. This is significant coverage by any measure, let alone for someone who died so long ago. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:29, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Several independent, secondary reliable sources mention him; no reason why we shouldn't. This doesn't fail WP:DEL#REASON as far as I can see. - SchroCat (talk) 18:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per the sources supplied by Aymatth2. There are many other soldiers like Siegfried Karfunkelstein who deserve their notability. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:49, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Aymatth2. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nothing to add to Aymatth2's post, just reposting a vote. SPACKlick (talk) 13:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A soldier who had a minor role in various roles, and was given a low-level decoration. That is not enough to make him notable. Anything else would give us a different standard for keeping articles on Jews as for other people.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:15, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.