Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Hans Waldmann (fighter pilot)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article still meets A-Class criteria - TomStar81 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 06:20, 27 April 2019 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Hans Waldmann (fighter pilot)[edit]

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (talk)

I am nominating this article for A-Class re-assessment because it was recently delisted in this GAR for the heavy use of a source written by an alleged right-wing extremist, Bracke. Pinging original ACR nominator (MisterBee1966, and ACR reviewers @Ed!, AustralianRupert, and Ian Rose: (Anotherclown is retired). Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:38, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments The perceived unreliability of the source is based on who the author was and who published the work. The book is not being evaluated on its content nor research which went into its creation. Subsequently, I am under the impression that there is nothing I can do to change that perception now. Any recommendations on content of the article, I can address. Cheers MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:26, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Any source must be assessed on the reliability of the author, publisher and the source itself. All three are important. I have not seen any suggestions so far that the assertions in the source itself are unreliable/inaccurate, the issues have been that the author is unreliable (due to extremist views), and some questions about the reliability of the publisher (although I don't think they have been properly made out at this stage, and are more "unreliability by association" than anything else). Hope that helps. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:12, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. First of all Peacemaker67 you need to tell as what’s the problem with Bracke. The GAR doesn’t say anything (the nominator only calls it a dubious source without proof) and it was done in hasty fashion. This is very important information because remember, the aim is not to delist the article, but to fix it. So we need to know what information used in Waldmann article and cited to Bracker are false, unreliable or inaccurate. Bracker is used for plain information about his birth, what school he went and what he did when he was young, what he did when the war broke out and some military stats (units he was part, airplane he flew etc). If someone can demonstrate here that the information sourced by Becker is unreliable I will change my vote to delist. Second, there are multiple GA or FA reassessments on Luftwaffe pilots who are done at the same time and in hurried fashion, like the GA above where people can’t even take part or discuss as it’s done in a swift way with the same editors working together: K.e.coffman and buidhe. The same thing happened to Hartmann article where the contributor fixed the problem and it was still delisted. Remember, Good article reassessment page says that you need to notify major contributors to the article and the relevant Wikiprojects. The aim is not to delist the article, but to fix it. DiorandI

Assayer is best placed to explain the evidence that Bracke is an alleged right-wing extremist, but there is a thread two above the GAR (under the heading "Tags") which alludes to the issues with Bracke. This brings into question the author's reliability. It is not just the content of the book itself that needs to be reliable, but also the publisher and the author. All three must be reliable for a source to be considered reliable, per WP:RS. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:45, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delist The discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 240#Gerhard Bracke makes it clear that anything written by Mr Bracke cannot be considered a reliable source. Nick-D (talk) 22:29, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
keep. I don't see any reliable evidence brought up at the GAR or through that link Nick. It doesn't seem to matter now anyhow. Erich Hartmann's article was delisted even though, as was noted, the issues were resolved. It says a lot about the complainant. Dapi89 (talk) 13:01, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delist: a demoted GA, where the issues identified during GAR have not been addressed, is very unlikely to me A-class criteria. --K.e.coffman (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WP:MILHIST coordinators: I've advertised this on the main page, but I think it is important for the project that we get a consensus here one way or the other. Any suggestions on how to generate more interest? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:36, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delist - per Nick. Parsecboy (talk) 09:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Bracke's biography of Melitta von Stauffenberg is cited by German historian Ralf Blank in Germany and the Second World War and by Peter Hoffmann in Stauffenberg: A Family History, 1905-1944. Kges1901 (talk) 12:29, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I haven't seen any evidence that the information cited in the source is unreliable or biased. Bracke's work seems to be cited widely among reputable German writers on WWII. If someone can present something that indicates bias in the information cited, please do so. Otherwise, keep. auntieruth (talk) 15:19, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per DiorandI. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Just for clarity, this was a procedural nomination due to the GA delist, I haven't formed a view about this nomination. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.