User talk:K.e.coffman/Sandbox/2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Air to Air victories[edit]

I have infomation that he recorded several victories but I can not find a total number of kills. A message has been left at WPMILHIST asking for help Jim Sweeney (talk)

Notability[edit]

I have nothing against this article, but I am curious as to how it merits Wikipedia:Notability ? DanielDemaret (talk) 01:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By being awarded Nazi Germanys top award for Bravery the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross --Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:03, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The subject fails WP:GNG as no significant coverage in RS can be found; I'm nominating this article for PROD. Google books search only brings up WP:QS sources such as Willi Fey, and the award itself is in doubt, as AKCR is not authorised to adjudicate awards:

References

  1. ^ Scherzer 2007, p. 127.

K.e.coffman (talk) 07:37, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@DanielDemaret: What's going on here? There were other sources in this article until K.e.coffman eviscerated it, claiming the citations weren't reliable. I'd expect to see more discussion of that. What say you, @MisterBee1966:? Chris Troutman (talk) 08:01, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the version before I edited the article: Dec 2015. It is cited entirely to non RS websites:

K.e.coffman (talk) 08:10, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A more constructive approach might involve adding some material and some sources to the entry. Here are a few links I picked up with a couple of minutes of googling 123 If I google { "Paul Egger" 1916 } I get over two thousand hits. Those links are the first three on which I clicked. I confess I'm not desperately interested in World War 2 soldiering myself, but not being interesting to me (nor even to you) is not really much of a test of notability. The guy (1) appears to pass the google test and (2) there are plenty of wikipedia contributors who love this army stuff: I'm sure you can find some to build this into something more ... um ... regarding for the interested wiki-reader. Success Charles01 (talk) 08:47, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Charles01: What makes this a WP:RS source -- panzerkeil.masodikvh.hu? And this one pinterest.com? K.e.coffman (talk) 08:52, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Self evidently, of the sources I clicked on, the third, which you don't appear to have looked at, is significantly more convincing than the second, which you have. The first appears to be in Hungarian which means that I am not qualified to assess it, but I am happy to accept that you evidently are. What about the other 2,000 google hits I mentioned before? No one is suggesting that you should use all >2,000 of them to source this little entry satisfactorily, but if one or two out of three are potentially usable ... frankly, that's a whole lot better than sometimes. Happy days Charles01 (talk) 09:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
He seems to have some coverage in English-language book sources, so I'd keep and expand rather than delete at this stage. There's probably even more in German sources. --Bermicourt (talk) 21:34, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Notability in Wikipedia is defined as "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." Which RS sources cover Egger? K.e.coffman (talk) 02:19, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, been around Wikipedia a while myself. And no need to shout. ☺ Bermicourt (talk) 20:31, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, no shouting was intended; I copy/pasted HTML code from WP:GNG. I will be more mindful of that in the future. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:48, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:K.e.coffman/Sandbox/2&oldid=1123997913"