Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gustav Schwarzenegger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Y.Ichiro (会話) 20:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gustav Schwarzenegger

Being the father of someone famous does not make you notable. User:Zoe|(talk) 04:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Weak keep. No, it doesn't, but he's notable anyway, if barely. -Amarkov blahedits 04:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment It might in this case as his life history has been a subject of debate or criticism in the media and society. Similar, if fairly different, to Hutton Gibson. That said I'm not certain enough to make a vote on it.--T. Anthony 04:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete as per nom. Fails WP:BIO. Very minor Nazi/SA member and WWII German military police officer who just happens to have a famous son. In addition, article smacks of anti-Arnie scandal-mongering. Aside of one passing mention of one newspaper headline, linked sources do not indicate that Gustav Schwarzenegger was a "high-ranking" Nazi or WWII German soldier - they indicate instead that he was a "low ranking" Nazi party member who attained the rank of "Master Sergeant" in the military police. Also, article insinuates sinister crimes by Gustav only to finally state that there is no proof of any direct connection to any crimes and that he was cleared of any suspicions. That's just not cricket. Merge a brief mention to the main Arnie article if there's nothing already there, but no justification for own article Bwithh 04:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
This book on Arnie also says that highest rank in Nazi military Gustav achieved was master sergeant[1] Bwithh 04:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I've edited the lead to say "high-ranking enlisted soldier" instead of "high-ranking soldier". Master Sergeant is a significant enlisted rank with command responsibility. It is near the top enlisted rank in the Wehrmacht. --Dhartung | Talk 07:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. He was made notable by political opponents in 2003 during the California recall election. His greatest claim to fame might be that he's the dad of Arnold, but his life story was still covered by multiple independent sources, which appear to be properly sourced in the article. WP:BIO trumps unwritten rule of thumbs like "notability is not inherited". hateless 06:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
WP:BIO guideline asks that the coverage take the subject as the primary focus. The primary focus of the coverage mentioning Gustav would be the son, not the father. In any case, media coverage does not automatically translate to encyclopedic notability. Bwithh 06:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
"Records: Arnold's father was member of Nazi storm troops", "Austrian Archives Reveal Nazi Military Role of Actor's Father", "Spotlight Thrown on Nazi Past of Schwarzenegger's Father", these are not headlines about Arnold. You need to put some considerable spin to pretend the last article is primarily focused on Arnold himself. If you want to argue that newspapers does not count towards the "multiple independant sources" rule, then good luck. hateless 17:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Being the Nazi father of a foreign-born California governor gives you notoriety, if not notability. Whatever the author's motivations may be, the article provides properly sourced context for Arnold Schwarzenegger and in particular for the "Allegations of Nazi admiration and support of Kurt Waldheim" there. Stammer 06:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
So merge mention of Gustav to the main Arnie article, if its not there already. There's not much to say about Gustav except that he was a minor Nazi, a local police commander and Arnie's discipl inarian dad Bwithh 07:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Meets WP:BIO, multiple independent sources. Notability != importance. Investigation involved the Simon Wiesenthal Center and others, received trans-Atlantic media attention.--Dhartung | Talk 07:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, he meets WP:BIO criteria. Independent sources have been given, it's mainly because of the 2003 election of his son that made him notable. Still, he is notable in history but not because he is the dad of Arnie. --Terence Ong (C | R) 11:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    • If he were not Arnold's father, but just a run-of-the-mill Nazi soldier, he would not merit an article. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - I gotta agree with the keepers arguments above. Chris Kreider 12:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak keep or full merge to Arnold's article. --RMHED 12:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per above. This guy is notable in his own right. --Howrealisreal 14:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep on the basis of being a person "achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events" and "primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works", as per WP:BIO. GS's military record and NS/SA credentials (and issues surrounding AS's stated ignorance thereof) received considerable attention during the 2003 recall campaign and were legitimate discussion points at the time, not "scandal-mongering", against the background of AS's apparent espousal of naive attitudes about Nazism and his country's past generally (at least earlier in his career). It's also signficant as an example of the Austrian public's being comparativelyless informed about their fellow citizens's (or many of their own family members) active participation in NS politics and war crimes (compared to the record of self-examination in Germany proper, for example.) The article seemed to be factual, balanced, and propertly sourced before I made a few contributions to it myself, which I did because I had heard rumors that GS was a "high-ranking Nazi" and a "war criminal" and that AS paid the Simon Wiesenthal Center to "cover this up", none of which appear to be strictly accurate. So far from scandal-mongering, my hope is that this article will set the record straight. User:Whiskey Pete 17:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Multiple independent verifiable sources to notability. Edison 16:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    • No, there are multiple independent verifiable sources to his existence, not to his notability. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    • It's his relationship to AS and his wartime activities, not his extistence per se, which are notable. User:Whiskey Pete 01:29, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Really? What in his wartime activities make him notable? What other Nazi master sergeants with the same degree of activity do we have articles on? User:Zoe|(talk) 00:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
        • Operative word is 'and' here, Zoe; it's is wartime background and his relationship to AS. --Whiskey Pete
  • Keep. Is notable in his own right. --Czj 23:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
    • No one has yet to indicate what his notability is. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
      • He is notable for being the possible tie between Arnold, a candidate for an American electorial office, and the Nazis. Having any ties to Nazis, for an elected official, or a serious electoral candidate, is extremely rare and notable. Possible ties, especially ones that can be taken seriously to be newsworthy, while not nearly as notable, is notable enough for WP. hateless 01:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
      • It is especially notable given AS's authoritarian tendencies, and that he claimed not to have been aware of his father's NSDAP/SA background. --Whiskey Pete
  • Delete. A Google News Archive shows that no articles are available on this man when he was alive. The only articles are after his son became notable years after Gustav Schwarzenegger's death. Worth a brief mention in Arnold Schwarzenegger's article but not in his own right. [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Capitalistroadster (talk • contribs)
    • I don't believe that it's necessary to be notable when you're alive, otherwise we wouldn't have the articles Vincent Van Gogh or John Kennedy Toole. I would also point out that there is no way that Google News Archive provides comprehensive historical coverage (e.g. of wartime Austrian newspapers) and drawing inferences from that assumption is erroneous. I do agree it is unlikely there was much news coverage of his minor activities. I also do not believe that notability, on its own, is the only determinant for an article's existence (notability is just a guideline). I simply believe this topic merits a fuller discussion than a mention in Arnold's article can give. --Dhartung | Talk 07:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge with The Gubernator's article and redirect, as there is some minor notability, but not enough to support individual article.SkierRMH 03:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
    • The Gubernator's page is huge and sprawling as it is -- there wouldn't be enough space to cover the finer technical points of GS's career without losing focus. --Whiskey Pete
  • Keep. As variously pointed out above, he's received coverage in his own right (albeit due to Arnie, of course), and the article is a good complement to the main Schwarzenegger article. Sandstein 22:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Whiskey pete. Being someone's father can actually make you notable. --badlydrawnjeff talk 00:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per the above, subject is notable within his own right. RFerreira 05:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Definately KEEP. Think about this. If Arnold becomes president of the USA don't you think it would be important to have a bit of history of his father around ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 57.68.50.33 (talk • contribs)
    • Let's hope we don't change the Constitution so that can happen. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  • STRONG KEEP: Fascinating article. -Husnock 16:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, possibly move to Arnold Schwarzenegger Nazi father controversy because that's what this article is really about. Demiurge 16:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep: He's worthy of his own article just based on his life, whether or not he's Arnold's father. --Wizardman 16:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
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.