Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fritz Lüddecke

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:43, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fritz Lüddecke[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:SOLDIER & significant RS coverage not found link, just passing mentions. No de.wiki article exists. Did not hold a significant command and topped out as Oberfeldwebel. Successful completion of missions (sorties flown, # of enemy aircraft shot down, etc) is not part of SOLDIER.

Per the outcome of the discussion at WP:Notability (people): Redirect proposal for Knight's Cross winners, certain recipients were deemed non notable and SOLDIER has been modified accordingly: diff. The articles of these recipients are being redirected to alphabetical lists.

In this case, the redirect was contested on the grounds that the subject was a "notable ace". However, the "ace" status does not appear in notability guidelines. A related RfC that sought to add aces to the SOLDIER essay closed without reaching consensus for the change:

MilHist RfC on the notability of flying aces.

Due to lack of sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail, I'm proposing either a "Delete" or a "Redirect to to List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (L). K.e.coffman (talk) 03:32, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:32, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:52, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:52, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This a pilot with 51 aircraft kills. To put this number is context a Aviation regiment (Soviet Union) consisted of some 61-63 aircraft. So this pilot took out, by his own hands, almost a regiment sized force. Destroying a regiment clearly meets SOLDIER(4) - Played an important role in a significant military event such as a major battle or campaign. We routinely haves articles on aces with much lower kill counts: List of World War II flying aces, List of Korean War flying aces, List of Vietnam War flying aces. Receiving a "Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross" might not confer notability in and of itself, but it does not confer non-notability (As a medal close to the highest-tier (in this case previously contested) it is not enough by itself, but it a supporting indication - just like the Navy Cross). Going out of WP:SOLDIER (which is an essay), we have WP:GNG, and in the case - +"Fritz Lüddecke" luftwaffe appears in approx. 22 (after scrolling down, raw hit count is 152 - 3 pages of results) in google books as may be seen here: google books search - page 3 of results (note there is a post-WWII German Dr. with the same name).Icewhiz (talk) 07:05, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Could you indicated two or three best sources that would help meet GNG? I'm seeing one line results such as in Aces of the Luftwaffe: only one mention in the book. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:22, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The ones I see in google books are all short (however google books does not archive everything, and sometimes doesn't let you see contents at all). However the bibliography in the article cites a few more. The ones I see on google-books are: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]. Fellgiebel is searchable, but I think Obermaier, Patzwall & Scherzer, Scherzer are not.Icewhiz (talk) 20:35, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These are one line mentions; some merely state that the subject received the Knight's Cross on a particular date. Many trivial mentions don't equate to significant coverage that WP:N requires. Likewise, sources listed in the article are all catalogues of awards winners. Such sources have been specifically rejected during the Knight's Cross discussion that I linked in the nomination. They do not establish notability. For a related discussion, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karl Henze, which closed as "Delete". K.e.coffman (talk) 21:18, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I admit that current reliable on-line sources are mainly brief (there is more info in non-reliable forums, memorabilia sales, etc.) - though some of them are more than 1-liners (e.g. paragraph and multiple one-liners in a few pages). However not all information is available online (and the articles cites some books which aren't). Henze is different in that he wasn't a fighter ace (or to be precise a deca-Ace - 10 times - with 51 kills) - while a recent RFC on ace notability closed with no-consensus - the bar there was 5 (ace) or maybe 10-15 kills. 51 kills is well above that - and is close to a whole Soviet air regiment.Icewhiz (talk) 05:40, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:59, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:37, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect or Delete A German "fighter ace" during WWII on the Eastern Front is not of the same kind as a "fighter ace" of another war or even a German "fighter ace" during WW II on the Western front. The kill rates claimed by Luftwaffe pilots over the Red Air Force of the Soviet Union were extraordinary. The Luftwaffe claimed to have shot down more than 44,000 Soviet aircraft. The top 300 German "aces" claimed 30,000 of that. To put that into perspective, the Luftwaffe claimed to have destroyed 25,000 Allied airplanes on the Western Front. About half of those kills were credited to 500 pilots. There were 107 German pilots who claimed to have shot down 100 or more enemy planes. Eight of those pilots fought on the Western Front. On the Eastern Front Emil Lang was credited with 72 kills within a three week period, among them 18 on a single day. I do not want to go into details how these numbers came about. But these numbers show that Fritz Lüddecke's "score" during this conflict on the Eastern Front was not extraordinary. The whole talk about taking out "almost a regiment sized force" becomes pointless when viewed in the context of air war on the Eastern Front, where he flew hundreds of missions. That might also explain why there is a dearth of reliable sources on Lüddecke, being far from significant coverage.--Assayer (talk) 11:56, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If this were a 10 or even a 20 kill ace on the eastern front - I wouldn't quibble with this argument. However here we have 50, more than the top scoring US ace with 40 (Richard Bong) - List of World War II flying aces. Kill counts on the Eastern front were indeed high - however many have argued that this isn't as much a function of Soviet air quality but rather that the Germans flew their pilots until they died (Allied pilots would typically fly X missions as part of a tour of duty, then sent to training/desk job unless they volunteered again) - this modus operandi did allow the more skilled German pilots both to gain experience (due to the very high mission count) as well as aircraft kills. The question here is whether we want him listed here - or on various "fan sites" on the web - I think it better it is here and balanced.Icewhiz (talk) 13:29, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That German pilots flew more missions than Allied pilots is one of the reasons why the ran up higher kill scores. But when you are aware of that, how can you still throw German pilots into the same pot with US "aces"? As "the top scoring US ace" Richard Bong received much more attention than Fritz Lüddecke and thus there is also much more coverage of his career by independent third party sources than of Lüddecke's. You might want to call that an historical injustice, but it's the coverage which matters according to WP:GNG. The question whether Wikipedia is a better place for such an article (you argue to keep the stand-alone article, not to maintain a redirect to the List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (L), don't you?) is not part of Wikipedia's notability guideline, nor does it affect it. The article did never include much information and the "fan sites" will feature Lüddecke anyway. And what does "balanced" mean? I do not consider an article to be balanced which brags about extreme battlefield bravery or successful military leadership.--Assayer (talk) 19:52, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:11, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete subject lacks significatn coverage in reliable sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:16, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Assayer and K.e.coffman's analysis. The Knight's Cross has been established as not being significant for notability for some time now, and the lack of general sourcing makes this a pretty easy delete. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2017 (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.