This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ernst Börngen article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This page was proposed for deletion by K.e.coffman (talk · contribs) on 4 June 2017 with the comment: Reverted to revision 756439932 by K.e.coffman (talk): Restore redirect -- pls see Talk page. (TW) It was contested by Icewhiz (talk · contribs) on 2017-06-12 with the comment: Undid revision 783711686 by K.e.coffman (talk) notable ace. Well sourced article. Passes GNG by book references. |
This page was proposed for deletion by K.e.coffman (talk · contribs) on 24 December 2016 with the comment: #REDIRECT List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (Bn–Bz) -- see Talk It was contested by Dapi89 (talk · contribs) on 2017-02-14 with the comment: notable |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Notability
editDoe not meet WP:SOLDIER & sig RS coverage not found link, just passing mentions.
Please also see a note at MilHist Talk Archives for background behind the redirect.
K.e.coffman (talk) 06:52, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
- I restored the redirect. Recent MilHist RfC concluded w/o arriving at a consensus that flying aces should be considered to be notable. No reliable sources have been presented apart the usual WP:QS literature & a primary-sourced claims table, which is not a sufficient indication of encyclopedic relevance. Here's the RfC in question: RfC on notability of flying aces. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:50, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- The RfC didn't arrive at a conclusion. In this case this a high double-digit ace (whereas the RfC was discussion 5+ kills), with ample sourcing. Bring him to AfD if you wish to delete.Icewhiz (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2017 (UTC)