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!

(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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Delete or rename and rewrite, as the defined subject is not a notable individual. —Michael Z. 13:42, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

You history suggests you are a ukrainian cheerleader - this is definitely news, you're just upset it makes your side look bad 98.209.0.99 (talk) 16:47, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bingo Joeletaylor (talk) 16:50, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
While I'm in favor of keeping the article, the last thing we should be doing is making our decisions based on what far-right provocateurs think. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 16:49, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

Keep. While the recent incident has certainly put the spotlight on him, he has a well-documented history and as apparently had a leadership role among the Nazi-collaborator Ukrainian veterans in Canada. Given the integral role that he's played in this national and international event, his bio is deserving of inclusion. Note that, following this event, Poland may seek his extradition on war crimes charges. [2] -2003:CA:8707:C60:1E85:2D36:7F42:DCF4 (talk) 16:45, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I went to several news sites trying to figure out how easy his involvement with the SS was. I found it in this article. I would be very concerned about this article being deleted. While I agree that he has achieved national notoriety for the one event, is irrelevant. It appears that a very superficial vetting of this person would find concerns. Don't hide this information. 96.30.130.38 (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He is the subject of a notable international incident and Canadian political scandal. This article should be kept, either as one about him or about the affair. DrOwl19 (talk) 17:16, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep. the incident and the person has now made international news and can be cited on multiple reliable sources. Anvib (talk) 17:28, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Rename. The incident is notable at least as part of Rota's biography, but the person is not necessarily notable. There were more notable members of SS Galizien living in Canada and the US.
Also, it's a curious cultural phenomenon: Canada accepted many of the SS Galizien veterans in the aftermath of WWII, but the headlines appear only 70 years later. --Amakuha (talk) 17:34, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep As the 1st and to date only Nazi SS officer honoured in Canada's Parliament, during a high profile visit by the Ukrainian PM during the war with Russia, and the subject of international news coverage- he is very notable. --TheTruthiness (talk) 17:41, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep or Rename/Merge. Deletion of this article would be politically motivated in my view. I would like this to be kept or renamed/merged into something like the "Hunka Affair" etc. This is a major scandal in Canada and has had international ramifications now that it appears that Poland is seeking this individual's extradition. TheEpicGhosty (talk) 17:44, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Move. This individual is only notable for one event, and as per WP:1E, the general rule is to cover the event, and not the person. If anything, this should be covered under an article about the event.Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 18:02, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"only notable for one event". That is not exactly true, it appears he has been in the media before at least in Canada; there are other sources from 2022 which noted his presence at protests against the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Anvib (talk) 18:09, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: While the subject may not have been very notable on his own for his actions during the war, the politization of him in recent times has definitely made him notable enough to keep. At the very most, this article should be renamed/recentered around the events that took place in Canada and not in Europe. EytanMelech (talk) 18:04, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, though renaming or moving to a “Hunka controversy “ article would be acceptable. Both the man and the controversy over his being honored in the Canadian Parliament are notable. His individual case, which may extend to war crimes charges and trial, and the history of the SS Galizien division as a whole are complicated and nuanced. A rational, sourced article that can help shed light on them is of significant value. Brons (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for tapping the wrong level of reply 18:07, 26 September 2023 (UTC) Brons (talk) 18:07, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep or Rename. It's especially become notable now with the Speaker resigning as a result of the event. Either move to new article or keep the article as is. :Emkut7 (talk) 18:11, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per others { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 18:12, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It is important not to delete history, especially a chapter as pertinent as this101.78.67.231 (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]