Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wacław Łapkowski

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 no consensus. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:02, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wacław Łapkowski

Wacław Łapkowski (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)

While valiant, meets neither WP:GNG or any of the 8 items of WP:NSOLDIER. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - This is another page about a lower grade officer who served honorably and fought valiantly but did not attain the notability required for having a page under WP:SOLDIER or WP:GNG.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 02:49, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Query does being a fighter ace satisfy WP:SOLDIER? I'm sure this has been discussed at length before. If not then its Delete Mztourist (talk) 03:57, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment - No, simply being an ace does not qualify.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 08:35, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per comments below regarding aces. Mztourist (talk) 10:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• sadlyDelete Clearly does not meet our notability threshold.Slatersteven (talk) 09:46, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 21:37, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete does not meet our notability threshold.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:40, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to No. 303 Squadron RAF, as in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tadeusz Arentowicz. This was a brave man who did in battle, but his story is the story of the 303. MozeTak (talk) 05:50, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. We have always considered that being an ace does qualify one for an article. We have hundreds of articles on people notable only for being aces and a number of AfDs have confirmed this. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:29, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep While being a fighter ace is not one of the criteria in WP:SOLDIER per se, it does attract attention, and I think there is enough material on him to pass WP:GNG. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:07, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep While more marginal than some, I also think the article merits keeping. He meets Item 1 of WP:NSOLDIER having been awarded the Virtuti Militari, Poland's highest military honour (albeit only at the lowest grade). And (I realise this isn't a very valid reason as not based on policy but) personally I think any Battle of Britain pilot deserves a page. FrankP (talk) 11:26, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep based on a search at Google Books. It appears biographical information is available, if in Polish, and GNG is likely to be met. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Draftify - He was a war hero but not notable enough for an article. However if anyone could expand it, then it can stay - Jay (talk) 17:45, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete We're not an indiscriminate place to publish bios of non notable or semi notable military figures. Ifwe have biosof others at this level,w should reconsider them. DGG ( talk ) 10:30, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep He certainly does meet WP:SOLDIER#1 "Were awarded their nation's highest award for valour, or were awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour (such as the Navy Cross) multiple times". He was awarded awarded the Virtuti Militari, the highest military decoration of his country, which is explicitly named in Template:Highest gallantry awards, as well as the Cross of Valour (Poland) four times. (I would be interested to know why those who say he does not meet WP:SOLDIER discount the Virtuti Militari.) As well as sources in Polish, a Google Books search shows two books in English, Polish Spitfire Aces, by Wojtek Matusiak [1] and Polish Aces of World War 2, by Robert Gretzyngier [2], which have information about him. Per WP:NEXIST, the state of sourcing in an article is not a reason to delete. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:36, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment - Hi RebeccaGreen, the Virtuti Militari is not the highest award in Poland for military personnel, it is the second highest, the first being the Order of the White Eagle. It is the highest award for only military personnel, since the Eagle is also given to civilians. However, the Eagle is the highest award. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:07, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Whoever compiled the template for Highest gallantry awards disagreed, then. I note that WP:SOLDIER specifies the highest award for valour, which is what the Virtuti is awarded for. The Eagle is apparently awarded to the "most distinguished", whatever that means. And it is a rare award - whether the Virtuti meets WP:SOLDIER or not (and the Template linked from Criterion 1 specifically names it, as I said, so there has apparently been consensus that it does), as the next award below a very rare one, I would consider that it meets WP:ANYBIO, anyway. RebeccaGreen (talk) 17:43, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Knoblock, Glenn A. (2007). With Great Sacrifice and Bravery. The career of Polish Ace Waclaw Lapkowski 1939-41. Merriam Press. Surely significant coverage. Looks like a tiny, specialist publisher.—eric 01:12, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Publisher looks iffy, but author may be reliable.—eric 01:20, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Knoblock looks essentially WP:SELFPUB, and this one is for certain, but along with everything showing up in google book searches meets WP:GNG.—eric 02:01, 29 December 2019 (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.