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 redirect to List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (Sa–Schr). MBisanz ^talk 01:54, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Georg Schönberger[edit]

Georg Schönberger (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Does not meet notability guidelines (low ranking commander), nor WP:SOLDIER, as have not earned the country's highest award for valour. Do not see RS sources to establish notability. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:38, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: several books seem to mention the award based on a Google Books search: [1], a few of which seem reliable. Not sure, though, if the grade of award that Schonberger received was the highest or not. Can anyone else shed light on this? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The WP:Soldier states,
  • "In general, an individual is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources. In particular, individuals will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify if they: Were awarded their nation's highest award for valour." The footnote states: "Some awards are/were bestowed in different grades and/or have civil and military versions. For the purpose of this notability guide only the highest military grade of such awards qualifies. See: Discussion regarding awards with multiple grades."

While the Knight's Cross was a prestigious award, it was not the highest grade (there ware Swords, Diamonds, etc). Moreover, the GNG still needs to be met, through multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources, which appear to be lacking in this case. The sources that I see are memoirs by Kurt Meyer and a work by a HIAG-affiliated Patrick Agte, who's been described by one scholar as a "neo-Nazi": Google books.

Please also see Waffen-SS in popular culture on these two authors. That's my read on where things stand with this nomination; I'd be happy to be corrected via presentation of sources, or clarification on the grade of the award. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, not sure yet about the significant coverage aspect, but I'm not sure that the issue about the grading has been confirmed. The German system doesn't seem to compare that easily with the Western European one where there was a clear hierarchy of medals and a soldier could receive one over the other based on the comparative merit of a single act. The German system seems to have been culmulative, i.e. multiple acts were rewarded with the next award, kind of like a Bar to the VC. I could well be wrong on this, but that is what I'm sensing. In this regard it seems possible that the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross was the highest award, but the Oak Leaves, Swords and Diamonds etc. were treated as subsequent awards for the same level of act / achievement. I'd greatly appreciate if anyone wa able to clarify this point as correct or incorrect. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:57, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Add: there's no entry for the subject in Neue Deutsche Biographie, the online German biographical encyclopedia. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:15, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@AustralianRupert: I've done some "original research" on my own by trying to compare the award rates of the U.S. Medal of Honor to the Knight's Cross. My inputs were: 464 Medal of Honor recipients out of appox. US 18M servicemen in WWII (0.0026% award rate). For Germany, 7,300 KC recipients out of approx 20M servicemen (0.036% award rate). Assuming that American and German soldiers were equally brave, for the Knight's Cross to be as prestigious and rare as the Medal of Honor, it would have needed to be awarded in about 500 cases. Unless my math is completely off, this equates roughly to Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves, of which 890 were awarded, a much lower number vs the Knight's Cross. What do you think? K.e.coffman (talk) 23:58, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, I think we need to be careful with this sort of comparison as it appears it was both a gallantry award and a distinguished service award (for leadership in battle). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:31, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect: I haven't been able to find much that indicates significant coverage, although there are a few mentions here and there (one assumes there may be more in paper sources in German language books perhaps, though). As such, in the interests of moving this debate forward I propose a redirect as a compromise solution, back to the list on which the subject's name appears: List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (Sa–Schr). I think this raises an important question for the Milhist Project, though, so overall I would suggest we hold off on further nominations of these types of articles until an RFC can be held to discuss what level of the Knight's Cross is considered to be the "highest" award. Once that is completed, more clarification could be added to the Milhist notability guide. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:00, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect if this helps get a consensus, as the article is still not convincing for its own notability. SwisterTwister talk 06:28, 26 June 2016 (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.