Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yitzhak Suknik

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 keep. Legoktm (talk) 05:39, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yitzhak Suknik[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)

Semi-procedural nomination. The article has been deleted before (under a different name: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Koza_-_Yitzhak_Suknik), but comparing the current version and the one just after the AfD, I am not convinced WP:G4 applies. In particular, many references have been added and/or substantially improved in terms of formatting. Still, after an (admittedly quick) look at the ref list, there does not seem to be anything that rises to the level of WP:GNG. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Military, Judaism, and Poland. Skynxnex (talk) 13:36, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I can't confirm because I don't have access to all the sources and can't read Yiddish, but I suspect the referencing is now adequate to establish notability. Maproom (talk) 17:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I can read Yiddish (but not Polish) and can confirm that citation #1 Hurbn includes a 2 page biography of the subject on page 219 of the PDF (which corresponds to the actual page citation of 533-4 given in the article). Coverage in the other sources is more fleeting, but given that I wasn't even able to access half of them online I'm relatively comfortable !voting keep on the basis of the strength of the sources I could read. There's OR-ish content where citations to sources describing general conditions or events in the ghetto are tied to claims specifically about Suknik himself, which should be cleaned up, but that's not cause for deletion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Soft keep Article may need a little love and some work on the references but the guy does appear to be notable. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 00:52, 7 October 2022 (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.