Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter F. Kutschera
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. LFaraone 00:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Walter F. Kutschera (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article is an orphan and IMHO not notable, he is just another pilot who won the silver star Gbawden (talk) 13:32, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The article being an orphan is not a reason to delete. However, there is no notability here. Fails WP:NPERSON, WP:SOLDIER. WP:NOTMEMORIAL. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- What about the Silver star that he got as a military honor, doesn't that count? As far as WP:NOTMEMORIAL goes, I can delete some info on it, show me which one... O.K. I deleted the time, but left everything else intact, since other information meets Wikipedia standards (at least I think so).--Mishae (talk) 19:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The Silver Star does not confer notability. Note that WP:SOLDIER #1 mentions a nation's highest award for valor - in this case, the Medal of Honor - confers notability, while #2 says that multiple awards of the second highest award confer notability. The Silver Star is the third highest award the U.S. gives for valor (second would be the various forms of the Service Cross) - unless he had an entire chestful of the things, it (to use the vernacular of the time) counts for precisely bumpkis when it comes to notability. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:51, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- What about the Silver star that he got as a military honor, doesn't that count? As far as WP:NOTMEMORIAL goes, I can delete some info on it, show me which one... O.K. I deleted the time, but left everything else intact, since other information meets Wikipedia standards (at least I think so).--Mishae (talk) 19:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, commanding a squadron in wartime is not an insignificant rank (what's the equivalent to Wing Commander in the USAAF, Colonel?), and the silver star isn't insignificant either. The squadron itself (No. 429 Squadron USAAF) will have had its history written. He's also dead and notability requirements are lower for dead people. There is some potential here at least. Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- As mentioned above, as the Silver Star is the third-highest award for valor given by the U.S. military, it is of no relevance when it comes to meeting WP:SOLDIER. You could, possibly, be argued with regards to WP:SOLDIER #6, but I'm not sure that rises to the level needed here. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:51, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, squadrons are typically commanded by Lieutenant Colonels or even Majors in certain circumstances. EricSerge (talk) 21:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Subject does not seem to meet the significant coverage part of the General notability guidelines. The WP:ANYBIO guidelines about awards would in this case have to refer to the Medal of Honor or possibly multiple awards of the Distinguished Service Cross. Though his service is commendable, Wikipedia is not a memorial. EricSerge (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand, but Silver Star is an award, which means he is not Just another aviator... I did removed the Memorial thing, so it should be fine (I mentioned it before your comment). Plus, he flew 35 missions during WWII isn't it significant? An expansion on the article would have been appreciated, but I just can't find proper sources. Maybe someone would do it instead nominating it for deletion? Would be thankful. By the way, this is my first article on soldiers, and it would be a shame to delete it.--Mishae (talk) 14:37, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Consensus has been that the Silver Star does not constitute a major or significant award. Depending on where you look, something like 50,000 Silver Stars were awarded in World War II with a total of 100,000 to 150,000 being awarded since 1932. He is, in fact, one of many thousands of aviators who served the United States in World War II. Not every squadron or company commander who has served in war is inherently notable. There does not seem to be any major sourced detail that sets him out above those many others. There are a lot of opportunities around the internet to memorialize the dead, but Wikipedia is not one of them. Though his service was, I am sure, honorable he just does not seem to meet our notability guidelines. EricSerge (talk) 14:55, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- How about you will improve the article rather than yelling what Wikipedia is not, and throwing your consensus around, (which I personaly don't care about) :) As far as "Not every squadron or company commander who has served in war is inherently notable" comment, maybe John Fraser Drummond is not notable too? Not to mention that it talks about memorials on the page there too, which your stupid consensus is in such hate. Yet, I am shocked to see Funeral and Memorials section in John Fraser Drummond article! Maybe I don't know what is considered to be a memorial and whats not under the consensus double standard?.. Another question, correct me if I am wrong, but there were a lot of soldiers who didn't got a medal of any kind at all, therefore your consensus should rely at least on Silver Star medals...--Mishae (talk) 17:18, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Consensus has been that the Silver Star does not constitute a major or significant award. Depending on where you look, something like 50,000 Silver Stars were awarded in World War II with a total of 100,000 to 150,000 being awarded since 1932. He is, in fact, one of many thousands of aviators who served the United States in World War II. Not every squadron or company commander who has served in war is inherently notable. There does not seem to be any major sourced detail that sets him out above those many others. There are a lot of opportunities around the internet to memorialize the dead, but Wikipedia is not one of them. Though his service was, I am sure, honorable he just does not seem to meet our notability guidelines. EricSerge (talk) 14:55, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand, but Silver Star is an award, which means he is not Just another aviator... I did removed the Memorial thing, so it should be fine (I mentioned it before your comment). Plus, he flew 35 missions during WWII isn't it significant? An expansion on the article would have been appreciated, but I just can't find proper sources. Maybe someone would do it instead nominating it for deletion? Would be thankful. By the way, this is my first article on soldiers, and it would be a shame to delete it.--Mishae (talk) 14:37, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Drummond was an Ace. That is what sets him up above the rest from the standpoint of notability. If you follow the WP:NOTMEMORIAL link that I keep inserting, the relevant part in this case is: "Subjects of encyclopedia articles must satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements. Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize deceased friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others who do not meet such requirements (emphasis in the original)." No one is yelling here but you sir. Take a deep breath, if this this is your grandfather or something, I am sorry for your loss as I am sure he meant a lot to you.
- Before I weigh in on a deletion discussion, I go look for a reliable source to add to it. The purpose of Wikipedia is to add knowledge. Community consensus, not my consensus, determines what gets included. This consensus is shaped by standards and practices written across thousands of words in rules, guidelines, essays, and discussions like this one and has shaped the idea of what does and does not belong. It can be overwhelming, but I will tell you many of us have been in this discussion before. The only difference is the name of the article, and the result was deletion for failure to show notability through reliable sources. EricSerge (talk) 18:51, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- For fucks sake this guy is not my grandfather or a friend, he is just a person just like everyone else is, though distinguished with a Silver Star which your consensus rejects simply out of stupidity! And this guy is not a flying ace? He flew 35 damned missions in WWII alone! Let me explain so that your head will get it, I was searching Google for a similar guy a physicist named Walter Kutschera, and stumbled on this one, got it? So, in short, he is not my grandfather or a friend, and I never knew of his existence before that day! Question, if he would have died in WWII (like in combat) would he be of any value to Wikipedia?--Mishae (talk) 19:41, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I suggest you remain civil and calm down. The points being made are backed by consensus. If you don't care about that, as you say above, then perhaps you should reconsider whether you want to edit Wikipedia. And the answer to your last question is no, it would make no difference to his notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:50, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- For fucks sake this guy is not my grandfather or a friend, he is just a person just like everyone else is, though distinguished with a Silver Star which your consensus rejects simply out of stupidity! And this guy is not a flying ace? He flew 35 damned missions in WWII alone! Let me explain so that your head will get it, I was searching Google for a similar guy a physicist named Walter Kutschera, and stumbled on this one, got it? So, in short, he is not my grandfather or a friend, and I never knew of his existence before that day! Question, if he would have died in WWII (like in combat) would he be of any value to Wikipedia?--Mishae (talk) 19:41, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Before I weigh in on a deletion discussion, I go look for a reliable source to add to it. The purpose of Wikipedia is to add knowledge. Community consensus, not my consensus, determines what gets included. This consensus is shaped by standards and practices written across thousands of words in rules, guidelines, essays, and discussions like this one and has shaped the idea of what does and does not belong. It can be overwhelming, but I will tell you many of us have been in this discussion before. The only difference is the name of the article, and the result was deletion for failure to show notability through reliable sources. EricSerge (talk) 18:51, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - The sourcing does not meet that required to meet inclusion criteria. -- Whpq (talk) 16:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Being a colonel and receiving a Silver Star do not qualify him for an article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:45, 28 May 2013 (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.