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. Geschichte (talk) 18:03, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Henryk Rolirad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

A handful of brief mentions, outside the source for Righteous Among the Nations, but that award does not by itself denote notability. Does have an entry in the The Encyclopedia of the Righteous Among the Nations, but that's a publication published by the organization which bestows the honorific. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:42, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:57, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:58, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete There must be something written about this fellow, probably in Polish. Not seeing much from what's given to keep. Oaktree b (talk) 14:42, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Oaktree b: We did find an academic article which discusses him for over one page (see my post below). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:13, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Some information in Polish about the fellow here and in Hebrew here. But unless someone adds it to the English Wikipedia it is perhaps hard to motivate keeping the article. ImTheIP (talk) 15:36, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I think that inclusion in a specialized encyclopedia (The Encyclopedia of the Righteous Among the Nations) is good enough, unless someone can show that the coverage there is trivial? Yad Vashem is a very reliable publisher in this context. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I would agree Piotrus, if that encyclopedia were not published by the group which selects who is granted the honorific. In that respect it is not an independent source. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Onel5969 It is a pretty unique case. I do agree that generally it does raise an issue, but considering YV's reputation as a very reliable, scholarly institution I think it is less of an issue. In this case we have a source that is very reliable, but not fully independent. I say not fully, but because of the YV's organization, I think it is at least partially independendent, as the work has surly went through a peer review with independent scholars involved either in writing the entry, reviewing it, or both. Anyway, I also found an additional, academic and independent source: he is discussed in this academic article: [1] (actually this is the same article as already found by User:ImTheIP which nobody else seems to have commented on?). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:13, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Piotrus, it's like if the 101st Airborne created a citation for service during WWII, and then created an encyclopedia of everyone they had ever given the award to. Also, the citation you list above is more on the honor, and then goes into each of the recipients. Just not seeing enough to show that it passes WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 04:30, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Onel5969 I don't understand your critique of the Patek article. How is it 'an honor'? I mean, historical research on such subjects is I guess an honor of sorts, but anyway, it is a reliable academic article, written by a reliable scholar (Artur Patek), published in a peer-reviewed journal (granted, Polish-language so niche, but still, reliable: pl:Studia Historyczne), and it contains non-trivial discussion of the subject, including but not limited to a 2-page long biography sketch of him. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:40, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Piotrus - apologies, re-reading what I wrote is not clear. Regardless, I was not saying it was not a valid reference. It is. But it is the only in-depth article about the person from an independent, reliable source, and that is the crux of the situation, and why this particular person doesn't pass GNG. Despite those who say that Righteous Among the Nations designation automatically denotes notability, it doesn't. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:31, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Onel5969 While I agree this is a bit borderline, IMHO the coverage in an academic article, as well as an entry in one not-fully-independent-but reliable encyclopedia, should be enough to make him notable. (And I do agree, not every Righteous is notable - but those that have 2+ sources like this one IMHO meet ANYBIO). PS. He also seems to have an entry in [2] (I'd not be surprised if it is based on YV's encyclopedia but on the surface it looks independent). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - To me, Righteous Among the Nations warrants an article; I would vote to keep all of those incredible people... - GizzyCatBella🍁 05:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC)Note - I improved sourcing and the article a bit - [3][reply]
• Keep Righteous Among the Nations is a notable award/recognition. Can anyone search for his name in Polish news sources? For what he did I think he deserves an article on Wikipedia. A founding principle of Wikipedia is to WP:IAR. Dream Focus 10:03, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per User:GizzyCatBella and User:Dream Focus. Thriley (talk) 23:18, 30 December 2020 (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.