Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Herberts

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. Given that the reliwt was made because this was a keep / redirect debate I think it is safe to say consensus is reached that this individual is notable. Fenix down (talk) 23:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jan Herberts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Seems to be an amateur player and as thus does not meet WP:NFOOTY. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 01:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 01:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 01:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 01:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 01:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, I agree he is not notable for being a footballer. He is notable for being a resistance fighter, clearly meeting WP:GNG. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,— Preceding unsigned comment added by SportsOlympic (talk • contribs) 07:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, perhaps merge. While the 2nd and 3rd source provided by SportsOlympic don't add notability, the other ones (especially the first) do. A merge to a more general article, e.g. Herzogenbusch concentration camp may be a better solution though. Fram (talk) 08:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge & Redirect to Herzogenbusch concentration camp, could keep it in one place. I am on the fence a little whether to keep such a short article or not. I do however feel a merge and redirect might work better to shed light on the bigger picture of the subject. Govvy (talk) 11:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect to Herzogenbusch concentration camp as above. GiantSnowman 11:45, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirectto Herzogenbusch concentration camp as all above. Sliekid (talk) 16:32, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:GNG. I am a bit puzzled about the intro. Barack Obama fails WP:NBBALL. Should we now delete his article? gidonb (talk) 13:06, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect as proposed above. Intothatdarkness 16:04, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep; he has coverage in a number of sources, for totally different things, and applying NFOOTY here seems absurd (Genghis Khan also fails NFOOTY). jp×g 02:43, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. SportsOlympic has improved the referencing since most people stated their opinion. She also expanded the article. Several users have worked on the language. These improvements have not been included in most opinions here. I suggest closing as keep and perhaps holding a seperate merge discussion, if at all needed. In general, it does NOT make sense to include biographies of prisoners in Herzogenbusch concentration camp, beyond the commanders and the diary writers. This content is best off if kept its own entry. So many Wikipedians would not have chosen "keep" or "merge and redirect" (vs "delete and redirect") if the WP:GNG wasn't clearly met. gidonb (talk) 22:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - the sources cited in the article and above (especially this) are enough to pass WP:GNG so a merge is unnecessary, in my opinion Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:04, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, the article was improved since the deletion proposal was initiated, and now it is much clearer that the person in question is notable enough to have an article, that can be improved further. Sorabino (talk) 06:05, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep As per above, qualifies GNG now. Setreis (talk) 17:26, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, as per above, this is a notable footballer. DmitriRomanovJr (talk) 17:32, 18 March 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.