Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yaroslav Hunka

Yaroslav Hunka

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Yaroslav Hunka

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Yaroslav Hunka (edit | 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)

WP:1E. This man is famous as of yesterday for one event. Not notable. cagliost (talk) 06:46, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Single person - perhaps true. But, he is a classic example of washing up the Ukrainian/SS-Galizien history of genocide and crimes against the humanity. Shall be kept in place. 157.231.243.194 (talk) 07:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
• Delete or rename and rewrite, as the defined subject is not a notable individual.  —Michael Z. 13:42, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• The individual is notable as he and his attendance at the Canadian parliament and the praise given him by the Canadian house speaker, makes him notable. his presence in Canada along with others from Division or the SS 14th Waffen Division is also notable and worthy of mention in this article as well. 208.123.202.108 (talk) 14:19, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

This assertion is false. Hunka is a Nazi SS officer that has been the subject of global news. If he didn't want to be known, he should have kept a low profile. 2604:3D09:147F:F910:19F5:E9C8:F704:754F (talk) 16:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Comment: non-extended-confirmed users are not permitted to edit this project discussion per WP:GS/RUSUKR.  —Michael Z. 13:44, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
• Keep, I haven't delved deep into Ukrainian-language sources but there's evidence that he has been active in Waffen-SS veteran's circles post-war and information that makes him more notable beyond a single event could be find. But even if there isn't, I think the controversy surrounding his summon to Parliament is receiving such a great deal of attention that's going to be known for a long time that it's notable. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 14:15, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Could not agree more. This was an historical event. Gary 7vn (talk) 14:25, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep per @MAINEiac4434 Killuminator (talk) 14:44, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep but move to "Yaroslav Hunka affair" ᗞᗴᖇᑭᗅᒪᗴᖇᎢ (talk) 07:03, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep but make the article about the incident and not Hunka himself GLORIOUSEXISTENCE (talk) 07:12, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Ukraine, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:09, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Move the article as per suggestions above, and have it focus on the incident first and Hunka second, as opposed the other way around. Hunka is primarily covered because of this incident.Cortador (talk) 09:11, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Delete per Wikipedia being an encyclopedia and thus WP:NOTNEWS. This person warrants no notability by themselves, is in the media for a brief instant, then is gone. 14.2.192.61 (talk) 09:28, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep the article looks fine to me, the incident has made Hunka a major topic. Maybe a page about the incident itself would be better. LilJohnnyWimple (talk) 10:11, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep there is no real problem with it. Jingiby (talk) 10:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep Considering that due to the controversy more of the subject's history are being bought to light and how it has become a scandal in the Canadian politics of recent time. Toadboy123 (talk) 11:15, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep Deletion the article after the person become scandalous compromises Wikipedia's neutrality. 37.186.45.57 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 11:49, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

The article was not created until the scandal. That's why cagliost nominated referring to WP:1E. glman (talk) 15:54, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep, I also agree that the article should be named "Yaroslav Hunka affair".--Mhorg (talk) 12:24, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Comment Why would the retitle be to "Yaroslav Hunka affair". Is that phrasing used in any sources? I feel like it's a very vague title. glman (talk) 13:16, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep, there is international news coverage and Poland is now seeking his extradition as a war criminal. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 13:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep, wide-spread international coverage of the subject Crackjack (talk) 13:30, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Redirect either to the "Hunka affair" which doesn't yet exist, or to the article about the current session of Parliament. He's not notable, the kerfuffle around it is. Oaktree b (talk) 13:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep. I'm not opposed to moving the article to cover the scandal, or even making it part of a larger article highlighting Zelenskyy's trip to Canada.-- Earl Andrew - talk 14:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Maybe rename it to "Yaroslav Hunka scandal" or "Yaroslav Hunka controversy"? Sidney.Cortez (talk) 15:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep: This subject meets WP:GNG as it stands through the sources provided in the article (although I'm open to a discussion of a title change in the talk section here). A note to the closer, this deletion discussion has been discussed off wiki on various social media platforms, such as [[1]]. User:Let'srun 15:56, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

  Not sure what outside discussion has to do with this. WP:BLACKMAIL is not a good argument. glman (talk) 16:15, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep. He has received international notoriety and coverage. Hunka is now a public figure. Evans1982 (talk) 16:11, 26 September 2023 (UTC) ----

• Redirect to a new page on the event, or on the trip to Canada. I agree with the nominator, policy WP:1E applies. However, the event seems notable. I'm not sure we've shown that it's lasting effects, so WP:NOTNEWS may apply. Could we roll it into an article about the visit as a whole? At least until we have evidence it's an event with sustained effects? Lots of arguments in the comments that to not reference any Wikipedia policy. glman (talk) 16:18, 26 September 2023 (UTC)