- 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 per consensus. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 22:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Überwachungsgeschwader ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG due to lack of independent sources The Banner talk 12:00, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment here are some possible sources: (1) das Neue Zuercher Zeitung (I have genuinely no idea who this newspaper is), "Das Schweizer Überwachungsgeschwader"
[1], see also an in-depth journal article by Heinrich Horber archived at
[2]. The article already contains a couple of books in its external links; Hanspeter Ruckli's book is available second-hand but I don't know if it's in any libraries. It might be a decent source.
Elemimele (
talk)
14:22, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- See Neue Zuercher Zeitung. It's been "neue" for two centuries. Phil Bridger ( talk) 09:20, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep -- A dearth of sources is not a valid reason for deletion. Other equivalent level units of the Swiss Air Force have articles, so that deletion would be destructive. Already tagged for improvement.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:04, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Actually it is, per deletion policy of long standing; but in this instance it's not fully the case. However, it's hard to find this covered in depth, and not as part of another subject, such as the book that I found that discussed the career path options for pilots, listed this as one, and didn't go into much detail. Then there's the overlap with another article. Uncle G ( talk) 16:25, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- The poor reader coming to the article might well wonder why the Swiss Air Force needed a unit for overalls. Did they get really dirty? ☺ But Elemimele is right, this is in books, and
Napier 2020, p. 259 provides the comprehensible English language explanation that the article at hand (clearly a not very good translation from
de:Überwachungsgeschwader, in fairness) does not. However, the fact that
Berufsfliegerkorps largely duplicates this article strongly hints that the two can be covered as one in some way.
- Napier, Michael (2020). "In neutral skies: Switzerland". In Cold War Skies: NATO and Soviet Air Power, 1949–89. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 9781472836885.
- Uncle G ( talk) 16:25, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per
WP:MILUNIT #7. Clearly has sources. Print sources are acceptable. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
10:33, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Is that a community decision or just a local decision?
The Banner
talk
10:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- WP:MILUNIT is an essay that explicitly states that any final determination must be made on the basis of WP:GNG. - Ljleppan ( talk) 08:46, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Is that a community decision or just a local decision?
The Banner
talk
10:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 10:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep I'm unable to assess the sources in detail due to lack of relevant language skills, but the two news articles appear solid based on machine translation. There are also two books listed in the External Links section, which appear to be related based on the titles. At the same time, I'm WP:AGF on the books, and hence "weak keep". - Ljleppan ( talk) 08:52, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- 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.