Talk:Johannes Lutz

Johannes versus Johann Lutz

Check WP:SOURCE. It reads "Source material must have been published", "Unpublished materials are not considered reliable". The image File:Urkunde Panzervernichter.jpg is irrelevant to Wiki. The reader has no means to verify the authenticity of the document. Therefore Wiki relies exclusively on published secondary sources. The reader then has the option to buy the book or go to the library. Both Scherzer and Fellgiebel list him under the name of Johannes, not Johann. Also a few online pages list him as Johannes (example das-Ritterkreuz.de). I acknowledge the dilemma of the situation but those are the rules we have to work with. MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:31, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Mister Bee, i own the complete Assets of Mr. Johann Lutz including all certificates like Ritterkreuz etc. You can read also the correct name in the divison Book of the 116. Panzerdivision. So it makes no sense to write the wrong name?! How can wen handle it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ww2Historiker (talk • contribs) 11:38, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Good question, in these instances we have to rely on published sources. The only way to address this is by pointing out that sources A, B and C say Johannes is correct, while souces X, Y and Z say Johann is correct. MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:40, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Notability

Does not meet WP:SOLDIER & sig RS coverage not found link.

Please also see a note at MilHist Talk Archives for background behind the redirect.

K.e.coffman (talk) 21:51, 18 December 2016 (UTC)