Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Friedrich Blond

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:12, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Friedrich Blond

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

Subject fails GNG as significant RS coverage cannot be found; fails WP:Soldier as the award cannot be substantiated. The subject does not have a de.wiki article. The subject is mentioned in a book by Florian Berger; however, this is a WP:QS source, being self-published. Here's a sample of his hagiographic work, The Face of Courage.

This article is one of roughly 500 similar stub articles created by editor Jim Sweeney in the span of about three months in late 2008 to early 2009.

The topic of the notability of Knight's Cross winners has been extensively discussed here: Notability in Knight's Cross Holder Articles; the summary in this subsection (Part 3). This article does not meet the low bar of WP:Soldier for WWII Germany, as the award is questionable, however, PROD has been declined on the grounds that this needs AfD. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:47, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:28, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:28, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:28, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The good news is, we can get refunded should Wikpedians become able to track down citations to back up the Knight's Cross claims once this de-Nazification effort has ended. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – there is a significant interest in Knights Cross recipients. If it later conclusively proven that there is an error with regard to his award, then the page can be renominated.Engleham (talk) 22:18, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Noting he was a very minor officer at most, and 28 April 1945 was not a time for major awarding of medals. In fact, it was basically at the end of the war. Lacking any solid evidence of his notability, regardless of any unissued medals, the article fails. Collect (talk) 23:41, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- With 7321 awards and the majority of holders being a redlink, I do not think we should allow these articles. UK was (is) much more sparing in its awards of Victoria Cross, which may be the basis of this one. Certainly we cannot keep such articles unless they have details of the citation. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:28, 21 August 2016 (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.