Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Berry Gazi

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 no consensus. There is consensus that the subject does not meet WP:SOLDIER. There is no consensus on the issue of significant coverage or if any weight should be given to the fact that he was the first black South African to be awarded the Military Medal. Noone seems to be questioning the verifiability of the contents of the article. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 10:11, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Berry Gazi[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:SOLDIER as a recipient of the Military Medal. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 22:37, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 22:37, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 22:37, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 22:37, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This person and associated award of the Military Medal is notable, because of South Africa's apartheid past. Barry Gazi was one of five or six black South Africans decorated for bravery during WWII. 500 Military Medals were awarded to South Africans, but of those- only a very small number were awarded to African/Black members of South African forces - who were compelled to serve un-armed as drivers, cooks and stretcher-bearers. The South African government also distinctly neglected retaining adequate records regarding these acts of bravery by native South Africans - so any furthering of that record is essential. Also note that Gazi was the first black South African to have been awarded the MM. Person considered notable under this clause of MilHist Notability:

It is important to note that a person who does not meet the criteria mentioned above is not necessarily non-notable; ultimately, this determination must be made based on the availability of significant coverage in independent, secondary sources. For example, Teddy Sheean, despite having only received a relatively low-level military decoration, is notable per the guidance set out in the WP:GNGdue to the level of coverage he has received in reliable sources. Farawayman (talk) 02:04, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:SOLDIER and lacks SIGCOV in multiple RS to meet WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 05:31, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep My sentiments are the same as Farawayman's position to retain this article. The contributions of African's during World War 2 has been deliberately neglected for white political gain. Their contributions need to be remembered. Conlinp (talk) 08:52, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete just doesn't demonstrate notability. Notability in this context is, as Farawayman correctly states, significant coverage in independent, secondary sources. Regrettably this subject fails that test. Humansdorpie (talk) 15:17, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Umteteli Wa Bantu newspaper and National Archives are very reliable sources. There wasn't more coverage on his act because the government deliberated suppressed records on acts of bravery by native South Africans. He should not be punished for this. Watsonc779 (talk) 10:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment User:Watsonc779 has made a total of 2 edits, this being one of them which I regard as suspicious.Mztourist (talk) 07:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have to get started somewhere. What would you suggest? Watsonc779 (talk) 23:51, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not voting on AfDs until you have some experience of deletion policies and WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 10:30, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your opinion but I understand WP:GNG just fine so I'll continue. Watsonc779 (talk) 15:59, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree and find it suspicious firstly that you even found AFD and that you would choose here to start or did you previously edit WP under another name? Mztourist (talk) 05:17, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, there are reliable sources covering him. Vici Vidi (talk) 09:47, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Because some editors seem to be misunderstanding what I'm doing by nominating this for deletion, I will clarify; I am not nominating this for any racial agenda. I'm nominating this because the article's subject seems to have a lack of WP:RS to be considered notable. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 19:47, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Watsonc779. BlueD954 (talk) 07:20, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on the lucid arguments made by Farawayman and Watsonc779. There appears to be good arguments for the lack of more secondary sources, but what we have seems to make this notable enough - first black South African certainly seems to be notable.--Concertmusic (talk) 19:59, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious Keep. I don't really understand the issue. There are quite a few published sources (including this book and this academic study) which appear to discuss him in some detail. As such, it seems clear that WP:GNG is met and WP:SOLDIER is irrelevant. Humansdorpie and Mztourist might like to reassess their votes on this basis. —Brigade Piron (talk) 14:46, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't regard that as SIGCOV and as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Makgotlo was a delete, so should this. Mztourist (talk) 03:41, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mztourist: John Makgotlo was not covered in reliable sources, so deletion was appropriate. There is no comparison to Gazi who has been discussed in some detail in (by my count) at least three official histories, two academic monographs, an unpublished thesis, and three periodicals. Rather more than many of our other military biographies! —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:20, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per GNG based on the sourced cited and the others found by Brigade Piron. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:28, 24 November 2020 (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.