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 Manfred von Richthofen. (non-admin closure) Empire AS ^Talk! 20:37, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Snowy Evans[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)

Prod contested. Rationale was: Seemingly "The definition of a bio only notable for one event. I don't see any sigcov establishing GNG." Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:02, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:16, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:16, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Manfred von Richthofen as he fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG is only known for that WP:1E. Mztourist (talk) 09:32, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Mztourist as an appropriate alternative to deletion. I note there are more sources in the Evans article than the von Richthofen article on Evans (specifically about his alleged killing of von Richthofen) so some of them may be able to be merged across. Deus et lex (talk) 04:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly passes WP:GNG and the WP:1E concern is mooted by the statement there: If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate. I'm pretty sure 'the death of the Red Baron' counts enough as a highly significant event to pass that, and his role in it is, ah, somewhat defining. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Bushranger I’d be curious to see the coverage here that you think clearly establishes GNG. Additionally, while its great that you think the event is highly significant, the rest of us are left out here wondering why— sure it’s significant, but highly? I’d contest that assertion. Even if it is considered significant, we still' need sigcov in independent reliable sources that establish their role as significant, not just what you are pretty sure about counting. I’m not seeing any indication there’s more worth saying about Evans from an encyclopedic standpoint then the paragraph already included in Richthofen‘s article. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:47, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:57, 5 January 2021 (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.