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. There is no consensus here on the validity of this list. Davewild (talk) 07:12, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of Nazis of non-Germanic descent[edit]

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

Reason First of all: please excuse my poor english. This List is not suitable for an encyclopedia because it is not notable, original research and is not verifiable. First: what may "germanic descent" mean? Germanic tribes moved all over Europe an futher into Africa during the Migration Period. It should be hand to find any European without any germanic descent apart from people who moved here from Asia and sorts. And in Germany on the other Hand there are the Sorbs which are of slawic descent. Even if you take "non-Germanic descent" as "parents not from the state of germany" you get to the Second questionable part: the List of Names seems to be totally random. Silesia for example was part of the german reich these days so people from silesia acutally had "germanic descent". Then Third: the most famous austrian Nazi is missing. You guessed it: Adolf himself. I think there is not use in this random list of names. Weissbier (talk) 10:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: if "non-germanic descent" means that these people have some "non-germanic" ancestors, this means that all Nazis were auf "non-germanic descent". See Recent African origin of modern humans. There more you think of it, the more bullshit this list is. I guess it's only purpose is to relativate things. "Look there were also Nazi-Jews, so the Jews are evil too". Primitive. Weissbier (talk) 12:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:17, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:17, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Remember that Austrians are of Germanic descent, so wouldn't count anyway! There is a difference between "German" and "Germanic": in this case the latter is being use to refer to people who are ethnically German, including most people from Germany and Austria as well as Silesian Germans, Baltic Germans, Sudeten Germans, etc (i.e. the people the Nazis referred to as Volksdeutsche). Ethnically German people don't have to be born in Germany and not all people born in Germany are ethnically German, which is what this list is about. I'm neutral as to its notability, but it is a clearly defined list. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:18, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:Necrothesp makes a key point. The Nom misunderstands the term, "non-Germanic descent."E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:27, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The nom's reasons for deletion are invalid. First of all, I'm not aware of any notability guidelines for lists, and the nom fails to specify which specific guideline it supposedly violates. It would meet the WP:GNG in my judgment. Secondly and thirdly, original research is not by itself a reason to delete an article, and it could certainly be verifiable if the proper sources were found and cited. I think it could, however, be trimmed to include only more prominent Nazis. So, in summary, is this article messy, disorganized, and filled with original research? Yes. Does it need a lot of work? Yes. Are these reasons to delete this article? No. --Biblioworm 14:37, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Based on the cited books, a list of Nazis with some Jewish ancestry might be notable (and Jewish is easier to define than non-Germanic). However this list as it stands is less specific, and there's no evidence that nazis with some non-Germanic blood forms a notable topic. Colapeninsula (talk) 15:52, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Interesting idea. I might actually like to work on such an article. --Biblioworm 16:32, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- This is a list article. If it were a category, I would want to get rid of it. There are probably several different groups combined here: Nazis wth Jewish connections; Grerman residnets from elsewhere; those who neither lived in Germany nor were ethnic Germans. The subjefct is an intersting one and we should keep it. That is not what I expected to say before I looked at it. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:42, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The concept depends on original research saying this group of people is notable as a group. Note that "non-Germanic descent" is being used to mean that some ancestor of the person was not Germanic, not that he/she had no Germanic ancestors. Kitfoxxe (talk) 21:34, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Any determination to place any individual on this list would have to rely on original research. Certainly, secondary sources might indicate that a notorious Nazi was of part-Jewish descent, or of Polish descent, or of Lithuanian descent, et al. But how is one to make a definite determination that the given individual is of "non-Germanic descent"? Ultimately, it would be up to an individual editor's discretion, which isn't a good way of adding encyclopedic content. North of Eden (talk) 02:50, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This grouping is original research. No indication that there is a scholarly consensus that having some none Germanic ancestry makes these people a definable group.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:59, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I expected to vote to delete. Then I gave the list a careful look. It is carefully crafted, with a deft hand for the nuanced shades of European ethnicity (Odilo Globocnik, Austrian Nazi, Germanised Slavic (Slovene and Czech) descent) and (Erich Kempka,[2] German Nazi, Ruhr Polish descent) The article does not exhibit the simplistic conflations of nationality and ethnicity that some in this discussion have accused it of. I do have a a caveat about sourcing. The two examples that I just mentioned link articles that include brief discussions of the family's ethnic origin. Some (Joachim Mrugowsky) link to articles that lack such discussions. I suggest that all names on this page need to be supported by WP bios that source the ethnic background of the family.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:42, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- You make a good point, and I agree that the article is full of high-quality research. But even though there is no set notability standard for lists, list notability "is based on the group". I don't think there's any reliable source that articulates a definition or analysis of the relevant topic, "Nazis of non-Germanic descent". North of Eden (talk) 01:13, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep See Nazism and race, Nuremberg Laws, Aryan certificate etc. This lists people of dubious Aryanness, who would otherwise be unelligible for citizenship, party membership, military ranks, political offices, etc. Very interesting detail of Nazi history.--Zoupan 18:23, 29 July 2015 (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.