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. Closing as a keep since the consensus lean towards keep now, with the presence of sources denoting notability (presumably) exists. The addition of the sources can be done further in the article, which requires expansion to incorporate those citations. Other subjects such as the notability of the award(s) itself can be discussed outside AfD, if required, in the respective talk pages. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oskar von dem Hagen[edit]

Oskar von dem Hagen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Does not appear to meet WP:GNG. No WP:SIGCOV found in reliable sources (some passing mentions exist). Iron Cross alone does not establish notability. — Moriwen (talk) 18:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Germany. — Moriwen (talk) 18:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• And where did you search? Geschichte (talk) 18:15, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Usual places -- books, scholar, news, jstor, reliable sources search, took a look at the German article to see if there were any more sources cited there.— Moriwen (talk) 18:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Geschichte, are you able to find significant coverage to support notability? I haven't, but I expect that my geo/language settings limits the results that might be available in other languages. Schazjmd (talk) 18:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated, yes it, receiving the Iron Cross does account for notability, as per WP:Notability (people). Antny08 (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antny08 (talk) 18:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Side note, person mentioned in article has article about him in German that has not been removed from Wikipedia, because he has enough notability. Antny08 (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Each language Wikipedia has its own rules for notability. And Iron Cross tells us that in WWI, nearly 5.5 million Iron Cross (combining 1st class and 2d class) awards were made, so I don't think receiving that award alone is sufficient for notability. Schazjmd (talk) 19:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but Wikipedia does not state that the amount of people who have received the award is a factor into notability. It is still an important and significant award, which passed the guidelines present. Antny08 (talk) 20:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want us to create a second Wikipedia's worth of articles over such a meaningless award? Lettler^{hello • contribs} 20:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He actually recieved the Oak Leaves on his iron cross, which only 95 people ever recieved posthumously. Antny08 (talk) 21:40, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Antny08, you're referring to WP:ANYBIO (1. The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor). Please note the lead under Additional criteria which points out: "Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included." Schazjmd (talk) 20:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just because it does not guarantee automatic notability, it contributes heavily. This factor combined with this website (https://www.tracesofwar.com/persons/50101/Hagen-von-dem-Oskar.htm) which is a reliable biography on this person should prove all notability needed. Antny08 (talk) 20:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.feldgrau.com/WW2-German-Officer-Oskar-von-dem-Hagen This site is also another source specifically about him. Antny08 (talk) 20:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha! Turns out, he received the oak leaves on his Iron Cross posthumously, which only 95 people ever received, as shown in Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross. This is far more rare and significant than 5.5 million people. I believe this should more than enough prove his notability. Antny08 (talk) 20:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: He existed, [1], but that's about all I can find. A name in a long list doesn't get you notability here, we'd need a biographical article or something else about this person. Oaktree b (talk) 19:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  https://www.tracesofwar.com/persons/50101/Hagen-von-dem-Oskar.htm

  Please refer to this source here. Antny08 (talk) 20:31, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I'd like to keep articles about WW2 people, but this man doesn't pass WP:GNG. There's the generals.dk source, which is unreliable, and nothing else. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 20:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  As stated earlier:

  "Person mentioned in article has received the Iron Cross award, which per Wikipedia:Notability (people), is enough to make him automatically notable enough for Wikipedia. While the first source may be unreliable, the second source present in the article, which also states he has received the Iron Cross like the first one, is in fact reliable." Antny08 (talk) 20:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As I mentioned on the article's talk page, I was unable to find any significant coverage, and I couldn't find anything in the German WP article to support notability. Nearly 5.5 million Iron Cross (combining 1st class and 2d class) awards were made, so that isn't significant enough for notability on its own. The links that have been mentioned in this discussion so far are basically entries in non-selective database-type websites. Oskar von dem Hagen isn't mentioned anywhere else on wikipedia so there aren't any relevant redirect targets. It's possible that there are German-language history books that might provide significant coverage but not that I can find (possibly due to my geo location and language settings), so unless another editor is able to come up with significant coverage in reliable sources, I think the article fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Schazjmd (talk) 20:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  As I just replied to one of your other comments, it turns out, "he received the oak leaves on his Iron Cross posthumously, which only 95 people ever received, as shown in Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross. This is far more rare and significant than 5.5 million people. I believe this should more than enough prove his notability." Also, he is mentioned in the Battle of Zeeland. Antny08 (talk) 20:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for catching that mention; I didn't find it because they used his first initial instead of Oskar. Nothing in the article about him though, so still not a very good redirect target. Schazjmd (talk) 20:59, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Subject fails GNG. WP:MILPEOPLE is no longer the rule here. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:11, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I wouldn't say the article passes WP: SIGCOV. But passes WP: GNG. For an army general who contributed in the First & Second world war obviously was notable. For someone who was most active in 1800's and 1900's, there should be WP:SYSTEMICBIAS especially with the lack of online sources. I wouldn't vote for now, till I get to read the cited books. Otuọcha (talk) 21:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  He was an officer in WWI and WWII but not a general during those wars. He was a colonel in WWII and promoted posthumously. Schazjmd (talk) 21:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. It's difficult to see how a colonel who was killed in battle was notable absent other information. The German-language article is barely referenced; the Almanach de Gotha entry is presumably about his family, not him. I don't have access to Deutschlands Generale und Admirale but it sounds like an encyclopedia with entries on general officers; that can't be used to establish notability either. The claim that he's one of 95 posthumous receipients of the Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves is not indicative of anything. For one, the claim in the main article is unsourced. For another, there were 882 total recipients of that grade of the award, including 78 army colonels and 43 generals. The article prose is concerning as well: "significant roles" (which?), "tragically lost his life" (MOS:EDITORIAL). Mackensen (talk) 02:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  882 recipients, but only 95 awarded after death. Antny08 (talk) 03:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, as you've said and as I noted. The claim the 95 were awarded posthumously is unsourced. If true, it's about 10% of the recipients. What is sourced in the article is that issuance of that grade peaked during the Battle of France, which would seem to lessen the individual importance. Mackensen (talk) 04:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  How would that lessen the importance? Antny08 (talk) 00:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves qualifies under WP:ANYBIO #1 although an ordinary Knight's Cross would not. Considerably fewer of that grade have been awarded than the Victoria Cross or Medal of Honor and we wouldn't dream of deleting anyone who had won those awards. I have restored the article. We do not redirect articles under consideration at AfD. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The article creator has blanked the article and also prematurely closed this AFD discussion with a closure of Redirect. I have warned them that a third attempt at derailing this AFD will result in a block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It is my article, should I not be able to decide what to do with it? Antny08 (talk) 00:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  No. It is not your article. See WP:OWNERSHIP. Nobody owns the articles on Wikipedia. Once you've posted them they belong to all of us. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Then why do creators of articles are able to faster delete the articles using speedy deletion? They have more privileges than others. Antny08 (talk) 12:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• No, they don't really. They can request a speedy deletion, but so can any other editor. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:16, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Has anyone looked at the book sources in the German article, which seem to be the main source of information for what seems to be a good quantity of text? BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  No, but somebody should. I do not speak German. Antny08 (talk) 02:25, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. We cannot say someone who meets WP:ANYBIO with a major award is non-notable when we haven't even looked at the main sources! The presumption of notability there has to mean something! This should not be deleted unless someone actually looks at the German book sources and determines that they do not cover him in-depth; although considering how much of the German article is based off those sources, I'd be inclined to believe that they do cover him significantly. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, I totally agree. We need somebody to look into the book source to gather this information. Thank you. Antny08 (talk) 21:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. I've found a couple of seemingly good sources that devote a fair few pages to covering his interwar activities and not only his death or awards: [2] [3]. Since I'm not a German speaker (I understand basic stuff but that is about it) I cannot really flesh out the article based on those, but maybe someone else can. Ostalgia (talk) 12:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Ostalgia interesting find, though I'm not sure they help. The second source is a master's thesis (Magisterarbeit) and probably not usable as a source. Both sources are concerned with the same event: a military mission to the United States in 1928. Our article doesn't mention that mission specifically, but it does note that he was serving in the Abteilung Fremde Heere [de] during the relevant period. Mackensen (talk) 13:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I am aware that it's a master's thesis, and I would not recommend using it for any particularly contentious claim, but it does, I believe, help establish notability and to an extent can be used for purely factual information (or so I believe). Similarly, it could probably be used to 'fish' for further references that may not be available online. This being said, my position is still that of a weak keep. If consensus is that there's not enough to make a decent article for this fellow and the article's time has come, then so be it. Cheers. Ostalgia (talk) 14:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Person mentioned in article has received the Iron Cross award (with Oak Leaves), which per Wikipedia:Notability (people), is enough to make him automatically presumably notable enough for Wikipedia. While the first source presented may less reliable, the second source present in the article, which also states he has received the Iron Cross like the first source, is in fact reliable. Other sources in German also exist, but due to language barrier, I cannot understand them.

Antny08 (talk) 13:36, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The sources present combined with the German sources seem to establish some notability. Since he has recieved such a significant award, I believe that he is probably notable enough to be on Wikipedia.

2601:8C:97F:30D0:5D1A:4762:7C6A:64E1 (talk) 16:46, 2 March 2024 (UTC)— 2601:8C:97F:30D0:5D1A:4762:7C6A:64E1 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

This account could be a fake account. They do say they lost their old account and need to make a new one. I am not sure. Antny08 (talk) 18:50, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – From Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross, they were the highest awards in the military and paramilitary forces of Nazi Germany during World War II. And this includes with Oak Leaves so passes ANYBIO #1. If this wasn't the case, then it would have been deleted. Toadette ^{(Let's discuss together!)} 19:28, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Opinion was solidly in the Deletion camp until recently when editors coming to this discussion favored Keeping this article. Relisting to help come to a decision.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Article and comments mention Knights Cross of the Iron Cross, but ref.2 in the article only seem to list his two Iron Crosses, which represent a far lower (and more common) level of citation. None of the others appears to be a Knights Cross, but my German is rusty -- if I've missed it, apologies. I would be interested to know if this can be clarified, for example if anyone has ref.3 book available (or other source). LizardJr8 (talk) 00:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Looking at the publication date, I do not think a 1924 book will bring any clarity to an event that happened in 1940. I'll try to see if there's anything else confirming this award. Ostalgia (talk) 08:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Update: I think I know what happened. Our subject did not, in fact, receive the Knight's Cross to his IC, but he received (on top of his IC) a different award, the Knight's Cross of the Royal House Order of Hohenzollern with Swords (this is probably referenced in that 1924, since he must've received it bwfore the Empire went bust). I would assume that whoever introduced that to the article used a machine translation from German and ended up combining the two awards into one (the most familiar one to military history buffs). Probably a good faith mistake with a side dish of WP:CIR. Ostalgia (talk) 09:02, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  But he couldn't have received oak leaves to the Knight's Cross of the Royal House Order of Hohenzollern in WWII, as it was no longer awarded. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Indeed, that's why I said he received it bwfore [sic] the Empire went bust. Over at the German Wiki he is reported as having received that award, and that line is supported by the 1924 source in question. Cheers. Ostalgia (talk) 14:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, but this article says he received the Knight's Cross of the Royal House Order of Hohenzollern with Swords and then, in 1940, the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves posthumously. That looks like two different awards. It may be wrong, but it doesn't look like it's conflated the two awards. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  A confusion based on a mistranslation is the only explanation I could come to while assuming good faith. I see no evidence that he was actually awarded a KC to his IC (and with Oak leaves, to boot). Cheers. Ostalgia (talk) 16:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah, I’m not too sure about this. I know he definitely received the Iron Cross. He also received many other awards. Could the fact that he was a colonel during the Battle of France, an extremely significant and major battle, count for nobility? Antny08 (talk) 16:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Correct me if I am incorrect with any of this information, but according to this article, only 8000 people ever received the Knight's Cross of the Royal House Order of Hohenzollern with Swords. Apparently, over 13,250,000 men served for the German Empire in WW1. That means he received an award that only 0.06% of men ever received. I believe that alone is notable enough for Wikipedia. Antny08 (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This source, Scherzer, Veit (2007). Die Ritterkreuzträger 1939–1945, might contain information on if he received the Oak Leaves or not. However, it is in German, and I am not sure where to get access to the book. Antny08 (talk) 16:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I agree with BeanieFan11 and, after reviewing the existing sources, I do believe there must be sources in German. While it isn't a BLP or promotional content, I don't see any harm in keeping it while someone gathers the references. - The9Man ^(Talk) 14:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the sources provided. NYC Guru (talk) 09:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – there's valid analysis of the sources above but I think the points raised that it does pass WP:NBIO. microbiologyMarcus ^{[petri dish·growths]} 15:04, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Based on the discussions above, I believe additional sources exist. Trainsskyscrapers (talk) 16:51, 13 March 2024 (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.