2020:
voters. Apparently the VM has been awarded a great number of times, over 8,400 from 1920-1939 alone (and over 1,600 previously from 1806-1815). This totals over 10,000 VM since its creation. This is compared to 3,444 MoH awards since creation in 1862 and 1,356 Victoria Cross awards since creation in 1856. It is true that there is a striking disproportion between the number of times that each respective government has awarded their "highest military award", but I think a historical prospective should also be taken into account. Poland was facing extinction (and temporarily was extinct) at the hands of an overwhelming force. To this end my condition would be to include in the article a RSed account of the reason for which Dunin was awarded the
Virtuti Militari. My concern is that without knowing the full details, Dunin may have been awarded the VM out of a show of respect for sacrifice and not because he went above and beyond. Looking at the sheer number of VM awards during this period actually seems to decrease the notability of the award itself. However, it still remains the highest military award one can receive in Poland, so that distinction should be respected as well. Intuitively one would think that anyone who received the highest military award would have done something notable in order to receive it. While sacrificing his life for defense of his country is unquestionably an honorable act, there were in fact thousands more who sacrificed their lives as well and were not awarded the VM. So to that end, what did he do to receive the distinction? The article stands incomplete until this additional information is supplied with RS. If this information is unavailable (destroyed, etc.) I would regrettably feel the article should be removed until the information can be supplied. We should remember that it is not the AWARD which makes a person notable, but it is the DEED for which they were awarded that truly makes them notable. An awarded decoration is just a symbol, a shiny little badge, and many awardees often remark how little it means to them. It is the deed that makes them notable, not the button on their jacket. --
1978:..." While he was killed in combat, we have no idea why he was awarded the Virtuti Militari--compare to articles about people who won the Medal of Honor or the Victoria Cross, where there is considerable detail about their heroism. IN fact, 66,000 Polish soldiers died in the invasion--what makes Dunin distinct? BTW, I could make the same case for the article about Rodryg Dunin, who is called "one of the most remarkable pioneers of progress in farming techniques and industry in Greater Poland." Finally, I have voted above to delete this article, but even if it does stay, it (and the related articles) should do away with the hyperbole and present a simple account of the man's life--not his father, his brother, his father-in-law, or his wife's great-uncle. The way it is written now is deceptive. He was not royalty, and he was not a recipient of the "medal of honor."
730:
about the
Thatcher family to have multiple (or even one) well-researched and fact-checked family tree published by a non-vanity press. I could write about my great-uncle, who was co-founder and president of a major bank, because there are multiple sources about his life, but I can't write about his brothers or his ancestry because, as interesting as they are to me, no one else has found them interesting enough to write about them. I could give you their names and ask you to write a non-COI article but you would not find anything on the web that didn't originally come from me. Personal family history web sites are simply not reliable sources. A good site might be a legitimate external link, if it had copies of letters, documents, and so forth that the historian had accumulated. The family tree cited
1130:
the szlachta there were distinctions. Some were considered of the noble class, while still effectively living as poor peasants. Others were landowners and wielded considerable power. And a few (very few) others actually had hereditary titles. It is my opinion that those with the titles, meet the "notability" standard. I can say from my own personal research on family trees, that I would often see genealogists in past generations bending over backwards to expand the boundaries of their own trees, to prove a link to someone with a title, even if it was a "third-cousin by marriage" or something. For another example, on family crests, there are usually various symbols, and sometimes those symbols reflected great power, such as actually having a crown. Antoni Dunin's crest had this.
2121:. It's hard to comprehend as an individual, but a ridiculous amount of people have a relative, or even several, that have accomplished things. A sense of family pride is inevitable no matter how objective you try to be. If the subject were notable by Knowledge (XXG)'s standards, a completely unrelated person (and not someone that the original editor knows, either, as much as I hate to have to point that out) would have created the article. As Danny mentioned above, even the writing style and wording used seemed to be trying to "make the case" for notability even before it was questioned, which speaks volumes, in my opinion. Third party sources are needed; not a family tree, or sources that only verify the facts, but something that shows why these facts are important.
1837:. There is some verifiable information here specifically about this particular man. Not only the medal list but also the reference in Korczak's book on which unit he commanded. The Google Books search suggests that some patient work at a Polish library might yield more, though of course we can't keep it on that basis. A personal family history website is not an ideal source but I'm not sure it should be categorically ruled out either. For the sake of full disclosure I'll note that Elonka mentioned this AfD in a private discussion with me. I don't think that's canvassing since she had asked me for advice on this article before it was nominated and it was natural to follow up on that now. Besides, I don't even agree with her.
1760:: It is sad as a lot of work goes into these pages and I have seen a lot of these family pages but I'm afraid they are of no interest or value to anyone not related to the subject. Dunin was probably a very nice and brave man and it is a sad story but even this coupled with being married to the niece of a saint does not make one notable. These sort of pages need to be bound up on real paper and given to his descendents who will value them but this is not what Knowledge (XXG) is for. The encyclopedia has to be known for being credible and providing valuable information on valuable subjects, there are many family tree and genealogy sites who would welcome these pages - why not take it there.
829:
family tree. As it turned out, the quantity of biographical information exceeded the amount of third-party sourced information. I apologize if it looks like I was trying to create a "fluff" piece about one of my relatives, as that was not my intention at the time. I felt then (and still do), that I was helping to "fill in a gap". There are plenty of places where
Knowledge (XXG) someday will have articles, that it currently doesn't. The Mayors of Warsaw, the Finance Ministers of Pre-War Poland, etc. I couldn't add comprehensive lists, but I could
879:(another of my relatives named in the letter) to get Antoni's orphaned children into the United States. It is also my understanding that Ferguson actually added a rider to a Congressional bill, to specifically name the children and help them get into the country (though I have not been able to locate the exact bill, so of course it cannot yet be used as a source). Whether or not anyone chooses to believe me, I can't control. But I am speaking sincerely here: It is my belief that
2417:
turned up during this AfD I am sure more is out there. In the unlikely event that this article was deleted, I am sure it would end up being recreated in the future once more material has been located. There is a difference between material not having been found and it not existing - you seem very certain that it does not exist (I guess that helps your case) but the amount of mentions being found seems to indicate the contrary.
2443:
higher than the 5th ranking award, so there's a less than 2.4% chance that Antoni Dunin was given the highest ranking award. The article can always be recreated if there's is enough non-trivial coverage by reliable sources, but being one name in a list of 25,000 doesnt suggest imply notability in my opinion at this point and the article has existed long enough to give people the time to find non-trivial reliable sources. --
814:(as article creator) I will respect the community consensus on this, but I'd like to clear up a few misconceptions. I did not create this article because the individual is my grandfather, I created the article because I felt that he met Knowledge (XXG)'s notability standards. I also created other articles about other family members, who I similarly felt were sufficiently notable. I had reviewed discussions such as at
2037:. It's an article written by Juliusz Tym in a military journal. It's reconstruction of the fight at the river Bzura - one of the most bloody charges of this campaign (September '39), and even we Polish call it stupid, when Polish cavalry with sabres and light firearms stormed the German tanks, actually a suicide run. It'a a very rare example of heroism and Antoni Dunin was in the first line. It shows that
74:
1207:). Who will want to someday know more about all of them? I don't know. But we seem to not be proposing to include all soldiers who received major bravery awards. That bothers me as it seems to indicate an inherent bias in Knowledge (XXG) - are we really that much more focused on modern music than historical bravery in combat? Seems to me we're in the process of giving our critics a lot of ammunition...
1003:. Criteria #8 says "Has won a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury or Grammis award" and #9 says "Has won or placed in a major music competition". No external coverage is required in addition to that. Are we really saying that we will include all bands that have won a major music award, but not all soldiers who have won a major bravery award? That result seems incongruous to me.
1885:. Sure, some info on what did he get it for would be nice, but even without it the article is fine. Secondly, the problem of family web pages is much more simple to me. If the alternative is either to have a two-sentence stub linked only to external sources or a broader, better article with facts published on his family's website, I'd rather we went for the latter.
1412:
Werner of the Polish Army in
England. Another daughter, Countess Zophia Dunin, was killed by German machine gun bullets early in the recent war." That's not bad as a genealogical source but it doesn't do anything to establish the importance of Zophia's husband (who isn't even named) as a subject for an encyclopedia entry.
912:
interventions) for the benefit of individual immigrants; there are many many nobles, especially if we expand the concept of notability to include relatively minor nations on the world stage; there are many relatives of people who had New York Times obituaries or entries in biographical dictionaries. So long as we have a
945:, before casting my vote can someone clarify to me if Nobility immediately signifies notability according to WP guidelines, as alluded to by user Elonka? Honestly, I'm not sure. There are literally thousands and thousands of titled people throughout history, many, many (if not most) of which I would argue fail
2576:- I must agree with the rationale given by Thatcher among others. The article is quite misleading in that it seems to claim he won the highest military decoration awarded by a country, when in fact reading the above debate, it seems he won only a subordinate award (i.e. not the "highest decoration").
1769:
Well then shucks, I guess we need to start deleting every single Medal of Honor winner, Gold Star winner, Silver Star winner, Navy Cross winner, Victoria Cross winner, etc.... because 90% of them have as much claim to fame as this guy. This has nothing to do with decendancy, this has everything to do
1088:
comprised between 8 and 12% of the ethnic Polish population, so it is not a rare distinction" Actually according to the
Wilipedia article he linked "Poland's nobility were also more numerous than those of all other European countries, forming some 10%-12% of the total population and almost 25% among
529:
Per THF, not a recipient of highest class honour so fails notability there, especially since no mention in article at all of military exploits unlike other articles of (first class) recipients. If he is notable for military activities, would surely require reliable sourced information on that, rather
440:
I still think the article is worthy of keeping on the basis of the award - especially given the tiers are affected only by number of men commanded. I was worried about the possibility of too many stubs about medal recipients with no further content- but judging from the additional sourced material it
2486:
As the discriminating criteria between the levels is number of men commanded (rather than different levels of heroism, valour etc.), there isn't much argument for restricting it to the first level ones only. The argument against including all of them was shear numbers, but you have reassured me that
2359:
reliable sources. If all you have is a handful of listings on-line which mention just the subject's name or other minor details in a single sentence, that doesnt qualify for notability. You have to have significant (non-trivial) coverage by multiple reliable sources in order to justify an article on
2019:
is the highest award. I suspect it is the inclusion of civilians that separate the two distinctions and perhaps a clarification should be added to the two articles. My understanding is that the class of the VM is dependent upon rank, so the class he was awarded should not influence the decision of
1965:
I have already voted but this is a comment on the quality of the article, should it be decided to keep it, or the articles about any other Dunin family members. The article should be impartial, but right now it seems that the wording of the text is giving greater prominence to the individual than he
1425:
explain that little misunderstanding regarding
Virtuti Militari. However I think you got that one wrong. The title of the article: "Edward Werner, Ex-vice Minister of Finance of Poland had Lectured Here" doesn't seem like an obituary to me; more like a review made by NYU or Columbia officials? Maybe
672:
Some of us who have been active at AfD over the past six months remember the
Arbuthnot articles, which were created in large numbers based on a fairly-well-written family genealogy that was held in a number of American libraries, and probably in other countries too. The problem is that there were no
464:
I was asked to restore the deleted content and I have. However, note that everything except the name in a list of medal winners and the daughter's engagement is sourced to the author's personal family history web site. Now, I love family history and have my own family history web site, but I haven't
2203:
I'm voting weak keep. My opinion is that this article just "barely" meets
Notability guidelines. Nobility and recipients of notable awards would probably meet notability guidelines in my opinion. So the real question here revolves around the use of sources from Elonka Dunin, descendant of the topic
2170:
to members of a military a tiny fraction of the size of that of the United States' is a "significant recognized award or honor." If they gave out 100,000 Medals of Honor, we'd stop thinking of it as significant, but that's the effective ratio of the
Virtuti to the Polish population. There clearly
1055:
As I'd commented to this article, this leads to the same question we had the MILHIST criterion (though since cleared up in this case): what if an individual satisfies a notability guideline, but there are no independent sources with which to write the article? Do we create a stub that will never be
828:
And I had plenty of primary sources which confirmed the information, and were summarized in my family tree. Granted, there's not much more than a stub article here, but I felt that there was enough for a "real" stub. I also added some other minor biographical information, which is sourced to my own
2610:
per PMAnderson and others; I see multiple reliable sources, especially since the expansion. A merge might be more approriate; I think merges should be used more often in non-fiction topics, because they strengthen ideas into an greater whole that has a better chance of showing solid notability. In
2592:
per Haukur, but that is a normal editing action, not a deletion). It would be nice to have a source for the class of tne
Virtuti Militari, and the reason for it; but I see no reason to doubt the claim here that it is Class III, which would be unquestionably notable. (And such sources may exist; if
2184:
And that's why I didn't take a position, because it's not clear whether he received the highest award. Apparently the Virtuti Militari has several flavors, some rare, and some not so much. We don't write articles about every Purple Heart and Bronze Star winner, though they may certainly be brave
1448:
Thank you. You were right. There was only an info about his wife - Zofia Dunin - killed by German bullets in 1939. So, I shifted this reference to its proper place. The other reference I checked also, is non-negotiable, so, there was one Antoni Dunin distinguished by a Virtuti Militari cross after
1384:
as per reference No 1. New York Times has archived its articles on internet since 1981. There is no way to go back to 1945 to verify it, but all other references check out. Even the author of AfD acknowledged he posted it for all the wrong reasons - inadmissible evidence. A very noble count from a
1129:
is one of those words that doesn't have a direct easy translation to English, though I recommend reading the Knowledge (XXG) article on the subject. Some might define it as "gentry", others as "noble class," but neither of those really hits it either. In any case, I would point out that even among
1994:
Seems notable enough... I wonder if this article would survive in the polish wiki? I think here there are far too many people expressing opinions on subjects they know far to little about. I also think that its wrong to claim OR here as obviously Elonka had to have sources to create the tree to
924:
guidelines, these are not enough for notability for individual articles. I further note that many dead-tree and Knowledge (XXG) biographies include information about a subject's parents and children, and nothing prevents Elonka or others from updating the articles for Dunin's father and children
729:
I am also a family history buff. With the exception of a few very notable families, (e.g. the Kennedys) whose history is researched, documented and published by multiple biographers, almost all family history is original research as defined by Knowledge (XXG). Simply put, not enough people care
702:
Just out of curiosity, had this article been created by a non-relative and the family tree references used been cited by an individual other than the person who created it, would this even be a RS/V/OR issue? I've seen entirely unsourced articles brought for deletion that were kept based upon the
629:
I have never dealt with Elonka in my life before today, and resent the questioning of my good faith. There is new information: the previous discussion incorrectly claimed repeatedly that there was notability because Dunin was the recipient of the highest Polish military honor, but Dunin does not
2416:
Its been established that the level of award relates only to the number of men commanded so I'm not sure thats relevant. As to coverage - well of course most of it will be in Polish and on paper, which makes it difficult to dig up at short notice. Though given the surprising amount that has been
1411:
So do I. I hate to belabor this since I normally avoid AfD and I do not like to have to criticize someone's heartfelt and sincere hard work. But, the NY Times reference is an obituary for Edward Werner. It says "Surviving are a daughter, Mrs. Maria Ciechomska of Warsaw, and a son, Lieut. Karol
2442:
that this award was given to 17,400 people in the 20th century and to a total of 25,000 people throughout history. Adding in his opinion, he also said that he believed that getting this award doesnt make someone automatically notable. He also said that very few people (less than 600) were given
1193:
measure of importance, we are left to decide whether the various aspects of his life add up to importance, and that will always be subjective. Does his title, status as a decorated war casualty, and marriage to the daughter of an important person add up to a "notable" life (as the term is used
1266:
Not sure about that AnonEMouse - to take as an example the first example you gave, without looking at the others, 128 google hits for Perikles Pierrakos-Mavromichalis from a wide variety of sources, and that article is a stub. Maybe I am misunderstanding regarding what is termed as independent
2503:
I couldnt verify Shelly's claim of "number of men commanded", nor his claim that Antoni won the 3rd level award. All we know is that there's no reliable source that confirms the type of award that Antoni received, and whether he even commanded a group of men or was just a soldier. He could be
2385:
Notability is established by the Virtuti Militari award, I don't think multiple non-trivial sources are also required here. The sources seem to be enough to write a stub about him - there are some details of his military career (see source #8 - Juliusz Tym (2005). Kawaleria w bitwie nad Bzurą
911:
I appreciate the sincerity of Elonka's position, and do not question her good faith in creating the article. But I believe that even if this additional information were included, there would be a lack of notability meriting its own article. There are many Congressional bills (and senatorial
949:. If Nobility does not = Notability, and with the apparent lack of RS, then this article seems to fail. If Nobility = Notability then its a pass on that merit alone, provided of course that his entitlement can be established through RS, which shouldn't be too difficult I would think. --
998:
inherently notable, regardless of whether or not they've been covered in the press. This is especially the case when dealing with things that happened in the past, for which judging the amount of popular attention is more difficult. As a more current example, take a look at
1518:
is that multiple independent sources are readily available. (In 5 minutes I found at least 5 NY Times articles.) I do family history research and I know why it is rarely suitable for Knowledge (XXG), and it has nothing to do with the particular author of this article.
1811:
article? There's no way to have an actual bio article on this guy with such little verifiable info on it. For those of you obsessing over editors rather than content, knock it off. Don't assume other people can't see past the personalities, just because you can't.
962:
Notability comes from sources, not from our own original made-up criteria. Anyone who asserts "being an X makes a thing automatically notable" is either misguided, or is oversimplifying the situation. Saying "A Nobel prize winner is automatically notable" is correct
1385:
very notable family, and veteran of the first days of WWII (Polish September 1939), died young in combat, highly distinguished by an equivalent of an OBE/KBE (verifiable), survived by only few kids, one of whom became a senior wikipedian. What's wrong with that?
1136:
and other documents and a few dishes. Proof of the importance of the title is also reflected by other family relationships, which proved that Antoni Dunin wasn't an isolated szlachta, but was a member of an influential and intellectual family. His marriage
755:
An interesting life story and nobility alone do not seem to meet the ever-subjective notability threshold. But, if notability can be established, then I'd have no objection to the article be resurrected or recreated. (Someone other than me, that is...)
2220:
as well. I agree with Wikidudeman's opinion. While I feel Elonka and her parents are clearly 100% notable, this falls into more dubious circumstances. However, due to awards he has received, I believe he at least qualifies as notable, if anything else.
2150:. "A person is generally notable if they meet any of the following standards:... The person has received significant recognized awards or honors." If the tone of the article is incorrect, anyone can fix it. We don't delete articles because of tone. -
285:
Created by a relative is not automatically a reason for deletion. As an experiment, though, I removed original research sourced to a family web site. There's not much left. Although it is stated that he "was a Polish nobleman (szlachta),", the
833:
and add the bits and pieces of sources that I had access to at the time. Since I created the article, other sources have become available too, though they haven't been added to the article yet (and some are in Polish). Confirmation of his family
2386:(Cavalry in the Battle of Bzura). Polonia Militaris. Retrieved on August 24, 2007) and the details of his marriage (sourced to the NewYork Times) for starters. Plus a fictional character based on him in a book by a notable Italian author.
1742:: W straży przedniej kolumny południowej szedł trzeci szwadron piętnastego pułku, którym dowodził porucznik Antoni Dunin. It means: In the first southern column of the 15th brigade went the 3rd squadron, which was led by Lt. Antoni Dunin.
581:. This AFD reiterates a prior, failed AFD, adds no new reason for deletion, was opened in questionable faith and is rapidly turning into, based on some of the personalities so far involved, more of a proxy referendum on our opinion of
891:
than if the stub article were kept for later expansion. If others feel that the article is somehow detrimental to Knowledge (XXG) though, and that Knowledge (XXG) would be better off without it, well, that's your decision to make.
2615:
is a guideline (not policy), it is useful/interesting, other similar articles exist, notability is inherited, it does not do any harm, Knowledge (XXG) should be about everything, fame, the google test, repeated nominations, etc. —
734:
is nothing more than names and dates, and although I'm sure the author has documentation to support this family tree, it is not provided--and even if it were, it would be original research, unless independently published.
677:
article suffers from the same problems. In the case of the Arbuthnot articles, which included a number of military figures, we did keep those who were documented as commanding a substantial number of troops in combat. See
441:
seems we can include referenced material detailing some of his military actity. His marriage is also referenced. There seems to be enough that can be said to warrant an article, and the award establishes notability.
430:
after the 1933 changes (Antoni was awarded III class in 1938) the difference between classes was the number of men you commanded. Since Antoni did not command a front or entire war, he would not be eligible for I or
2437:
asking people for more references since about a month now. 2) As I said, all the amount of mentions found have been trivial. Also, although I couldnt verify it, but an administrator on the Polish Knowledge (XXG)
2504:
commanding 3 men for all we know and then that wouldnt fall in line with the spirit of "nation's highest military award" (which is why they have 5 classes). Bottomline: we dont know what type of award he got. --
560:- Thatcher131 hits it on the head, here; there are virtually no independent sources made available regarding this person, and it would seem to be based mostly on original research. Thus, it seems he would fail
2335:. The sourcing of this article has expanded considerably during this AfD. This should be borne in mind when determining the outcome of the discussion- early commentators were looking at a much weaker article.
2402:
As Jehochman mentioned above, its not clear if the award he won was of the highest rank. If it had been a significant award, reliable sources would have covered him in more detail than just putting him in a
887:. If you delete this stub article today, my guess is that sometime in the future, it will just be re-created. I think that deleting it would be a waste, and that ultimately, it would leave Knowledge (XXG)
2529:
I couldnt find out anything about the number of men he commanded from the 8th ref. Regardless of the number of men commanded (even if he did), we agree that he did not receive the highest award. Note that
1570:
Indeed. It's very hard to assume good faith when you've all but typed out "Elonka is stupid for writing about her family." Should she just sit back and take what people give to her? That's rather morbid.
1494:
was a close personal family friend and father to my godmother, no one has ever questioned me, berated me, nor AFD'd the article in the manner in which Elonka is being treated here. You people disgust me.
195:
1605:, No 1 in references. No 6 is another. Besides, we are talking about WWII hero who died in September 1939 when only Poland fought Nazi while all the world sit back. What else you need? A review in the
317:: "Created by a relative" and "COI" are not reasons to delete. However, the article does lack evidence of non-trivial coverage in independent, reliable secondary sources, so I would favor deletion per
1629:
Ref 1 has this to say about Antoni Dunin: "Dunin, Antoni." I suppose we could write, "Antoni Dunin was a recipient of the Polish Virtuti Militari award," but that's not enough to justify an article.
48:, given that notability problems have been addressed in the discussion and the article has been improved since the nomination. Merging is an editorial decision that can be brought up at any time. --
1702:
1729:
You were right. There is another independent source in form of a book by a very well known Polish writer Jerzy Korczak: Cóżeś ty za pani: o walkach armii "Poznań" 12-19 września 1939 r. - Page 240
1056:
expanded? Do we expand what would otherwise be a stub with original research, as was done here? I think the answer is - must be - that satisfying a notability guideline doesn't mean that we
1141:) was an example of one family with a title (Dunin) marrying another family which had even more financial power (Werner). Antoni's wife Sophia was the daughter of the vice-Finance Minister
1490:
per military award. Not a WP:AUTO as the man is long since dead. Writing about a family member is not forbidden, as long as said content is presented in a factually backed, npov manner.
290:
comprised between 8 and 12% of the ethnic Polish population, so it is not a rare distinction. Without the family web site I'm not sure that notability is independently established.
81:
1920:"As for AndyFinkenstadt, I see him on a daily basis (he works down the hall). I think I told him that I was going to be going up for RfA soon, when we went out for sushi last week."
1090:
2033:
There are five independent secondary sources now, two supplied by Elonka, one by me and two by Halibutt. The reference No 8 supplied by Halibutt answers your question in full. See
1161:. This was a major family in Poland. I could list other relatives, but this list is getting long enough. ;) For one last example though, Rodryg Dunin is listed as "hrabiego" here.
2477:
If it was a 3rd level award, thats not the highest award so, it doesnt qualify for notability. If he had won the highest (level 1) award, then he would qualify for notability. --
1542:- Shame the lessons about vanity and family articles just don't seem to sink in. See continued comments from Elonka above in defense of this entry. Non-notable - delete.
249:
2487:
there are sufficiently few above level 5 that this isn't really a problem in this case. Whichever level he did get, it would have been the highest level available to his rank.
686:
that Virtuti Militari came in several categories, and Antoni Dunin did not receive the highest grade of Virtuti Militari. Irrespective of any arguments that might be based on
273:
Vanity article, created by relative. A figure of little importance, only sources are those created by the relative that authored this article or a single line-item on a list.
618:
Even if the opinion is unstated? You're going to have a hard time enforcing that. Don't be naive—everyone on Knowledge (XXG) knows how to game the political process by now.
1471:
as original research. There appear to be no independent sources which discuss Antoni Dunin, making it impossible to write an article without violating our source policies.
2306:
1039:
sufficient coverage to allow a properly sourced article. I disagree with most of the subject-specific notability rules for this reason. If you really break it down, the
777:
703:
addition of references to personal/official websites for the individual/organization by independent individuals. These articles were primarily based upon these sources.
1970:
can be applied to 10-12 percent of the Polish population,i.e., 2.5-3 million people in 1939 (discounting ethnic minorities). Further examples include, "His brother was
336:
To clarify: I completely agree that COI is not a reason to delete. I mentioned the COI as background for why the article exists, though I should have been more clear.
2171:
has to be a line somewhere: If Malawi announced that they were giving every soldier in its military its nation's highest military honor, would they all qualify under
1355:
1203:
I still think it comes down to an odd distinction we are hashing out here. A modern musical group can have an article if they win a major music award (criteria #8 of
1449:
the war. Elonka just misplaced the references. No big deal. Doesn't look like hoax to me. Still vote to keep it strong, even with NYT as secondary source this time.
821:
I also saw that those who were recipients of a country's highest medal were considered notable. I was able to locate a third-party list confirming the award of the
1398:
Comment: if the New York Times article is your reason to keep, you may wish to reconsider: it's an obituary for his wife's father and doesn't mention Antoni Dunin
818:
where the consensus on Nobility was that those of noble genealogy were inherently notable. I had seen AfDs such as this one that showed consensus for this as well.
190:
1703:
http://books.google.com/books?q=%22Antoni+Dunin%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wp
1851:, added another secondary source to the article (J. Korczak). Three independent ones should be enough for this article about KIA 1939 Polish count to survive.
1133:
I have primary sources on multiple family heirlooms which verify this crest. For example, this painting which was hanging in Antoni Dunin's home (pre-1939)
602:
opinions about a particular editor, will be disregarded in the closure of this AFD. We don't put Knowledge (XXG) on hold just because there's a conflict.
1164:
That "Hrabia" title is not used for all szlachta -- it's a specific noble and hereditary title, which is why I feel that it is relevant for notability. --
2454:
Thanks for that link Matt! If only 600 people got higher than the 5th level award (and Shell Kinney has been able to confirm Dunin got a third level one
406:. There are five classes of Virtuti Militari, and only the first class, by definition, is the "highest military decoration for valor." According to
2272:
530:
than general bio. The rest of article is original researched family information. Fails BIO, OR, and lack of evidence of reliable secondary sources.
925:
with information about Dunin. I do note a certain unfairness, as we tolerate far less notability than Dunin has when it comes to articles about
1966:
actually merits. For instance, he was awarded the "prestigious" Virtuti Militari, he was a "nobleman," though as Thatcher pointed out, the term
1807:: If the one verifiable tidbit about this guy is his getting this medal, isn't the obvious solution to merge him and all the others into some
1035:
them notable. Perhaps it's a small distinction. If by "notable" we just mean "suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia", then the subjects
1746:
506:
Extra heed? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but the fact that this is an editor's relative and there's been controversy should probably be
815:
90:
875:, which mentions Anton Dunin by name, along with his children and some other relatives, as Ferguson worked with Congressional candidate
120:
1031:
I see those kinds of criteria as rules of thumb about what sorts of things will tend to be notable, rather than a definition of what
17:
1064:
have one if and only if we have reliable independent sources with which to write it. Put another way, guidelines don't trump policy.
2015:
suggested requirements. I am a bit confused about the ranking of the Virtuti Militari, because in the VM article it indicates the
1194:
here). Or, to put it another way, how likely is it that users around the world will someday want to know more about this person?
1245:
222:
217:
2365:
2625:
2602:
2580:
2542:
2524:
2508:
2498:
2481:
2472:
2447:
2428:
2411:
2397:
2380:
2346:
2326:
2296:
2284:
2261:
2244:
2228:
2212:
2189:
2179:
2154:
2138:
2133:
2107:
2088:
2071:
2045:
2024:
1999:
1982:
1960:
1949:
1926:
1911:
1897:
1867:
1855:
1841:
1819:
1793:
1784:
1764:
1751:
1724:
1712:
1688:
1679:
1667:
1650:
1633:
1624:
1613:
1592:
1578:
1565:
1556:
1532:
1523:
1509:
1475:
1453:
1443:
1430:
1416:
1406:
1389:
1375:
1345:
1319:
1290:
1260:
1231:
1218:
1198:
1174:
1113:
1068:
1050:
1014:
974:
953:
933:
902:
806:
786:
765:
739:
724:
707:
694:
660:
647:
638:
622:
609:
589:
573:
551:
517:
497:
469:
452:
435:
418:
394:
371:
359:
340:
327:
309:
294:
277:
264:
226:
57:
2536:
Alternatively for staff officers for their cooperation with their commanders, that led to the final victory in a battle or war
1956:
Being royalty or the recipient of the medal of honor doesn't make someone notable. Being written about makes someone notable.
2101:
2065:
1943:
856:
2373:
2237:
1808:
106:
1655:
Then nominate it for deletion, and send me the heads up so I can weigh in. Of course it's possible that somebody will say,
510:
for the purposes of closing this AFD. The article should be deleted or kept on its own merits, not based on who wrote it.
2293:
489:
which alludes to some of the issues. I ask the closing admin to pay extra heed in dealing with this potential hot potato.
209:
2439:
1672:
1171:
899:
495:
2640:
2236:
there isn't much verifiable material to justify much more than a permanent stub. I thought Friday's suggested merge to
1134:
36:
1092:," - Clearly if 1 in 4 ethnic poles were szlachta, in the case of Poland, noble does not automatically equal notable.
585:
than it is a proper AFD discussion. I don't think we can come to any meaningful decision at this time, on this issue.
2166:. I agree that notability is objective, but I seriously question whether an award given three times as often as the
1663:
must be kept, too. You have to start somewhere, and, that somewhere is inevitably the item which has been nominated.
79:
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
1043:
we know someone has won a grammy, for example, is that there are lots of sources that cover that sort of thing.
1436:
152:
2639:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
2225:
2016:
1709:
1575:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
2280:
2146:
Notability isn't subjective. If this person has won the highest military award, then they are notable, per
852:
656:
Agree with Friday. I love Elonka as much as the next mouse, but this is about the article, not about her. --
136:
110:
819:
1770:
with attacking the article because of who wrote it, something I think you would be quite familiar with.
1708:
Google books] has links to some things, but they're all in a foreign language. Anyone here read Polish? -
1185:
It is much better to be able to establish importance independently. For example, by being listed in the
95:
2538:", so he could just have been awarded for being a single soldier and cooperating with his commanders. --
2042:
1852:
1748:
1721:
1685:
1647:
1610:
1520:
1450:
1440:
1427:
1413:
1386:
1228:
1195:
736:
485:, and there has been a great deal of controversy around her family's articles here. There's a thread at
466:
291:
2093:
More that "the Virtuti Militari decoration does seem to help meet the WP:BIO suggested requirements." —
1864:
987:
Friday, with respect I disagree with that. Sometime we set arbitrary inclusion standards. Receiving a
379:. Seems to me that all recipients' of a country "highest military decoration for valor" (in this case
2598:
2513:
Lets not get carried away here Matt, ref #8 makes it pretty clear he wasn't just commanding 3 men...
1908:
1878:
1249:
838:
731:
368:
795:
687:
679:
2621:
2520:
2494:
2468:
2424:
2393:
2342:
2222:
2130:
1572:
1214:
1010:
876:
448:
390:
52:
750:
2370:
Trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability.
2276:
2241:
2098:
2062:
1940:
1894:
1551:
1158:
1154:
569:
142:
73:
926:
2275:(recipients of a country's highest award for gallantry are automatically considered notable).--
849:
2319:
1778:
1503:
1368:
1338:
967:
is "someone who has won a Nobel prize would surely have lots of coverage in proper sources".
432:
213:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
2593:
the Polish Government has the documentation of the Order, they may well have published it.)
1315:
as a recipient of the highest military decoration for valor, in this case Virtuti Militari.
1204:
1000:
830:
2531:
2205:
2034:
2008:
1996:
1923:
1816:
1664:
1630:
1515:
1491:
1472:
1403:
1272:
1168:
1095:
1065:
1047:
971:
896:
822:
606:
533:
514:
493:
427:
407:
380:
353:
306:
2172:
2147:
2012:
1932:
1514:
Charming. Now I remember why I avoid AfD. Maybe the reason no one has bothered you about
1312:
946:
921:
917:
913:
884:
717:
631:
561:
486:
411:
318:
257:
2594:
1830:
1562:
1529:
1316:
1257:
1227:
other independent sources exist, then we can talk. Until then, its a straw man argument.
872:
691:
673:
other accessible documents from which a real article could be written. I believe that the
657:
643:
I know nothing of you or your dealings with Elonka—it is the timing that gives me pause.
630:
have the highest Polish military honor. I think most of Elonka's other articles satisfy
1735:
by Jerzy Korczak - 1983 - 328 pages. And here is an exerpt from this book, unmistakenly
1244:(surely a major award) with no other independent sources existing or likely to show up.
2618:
2515:
2489:
2463:
2419:
2388:
2337:
2252:
as article is well-sourced and subject is sufficiently notable as award recipient. —
2186:
2167:
2151:
2127:
1882:
1209:
1146:
1005:
988:
868:
644:
619:
586:
443:
385:
49:
2612:
410:'s comprehensive list, Dunin is not one of the first-class recipients. I don't think
2094:
2058:
1936:
1891:
1838:
1761:
1606:
1543:
1253:
1241:
1153:; great-niece of an extremely influential priest who has since been canonized, Saint
1142:
1131:
992:
845:
704:
565:
323:
1877:, I believe that all VM recipients are notable as such, just like recipients of the
2315:
2254:
2085:
1957:
1834:
1790:
1771:
1739:
1676:
1656:
1621:
1589:
1496:
1364:
1334:
1150:
880:
861:
674:
274:
205:
170:
158:
126:
63:
302:
unless properly sourced to establish notability. What's there right now is not.
243:
851:
Confirmation that he's considered one of the notable members of his coat of arms.
105:
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
2577:
2539:
2505:
2478:
2444:
2408:
2377:
2081:
2021:
1813:
1660:
1639:
1422:
1165:
1044:
968:
950:
893:
603:
582:
511:
490:
482:
303:
1935:
with your comment there. Back down a little and let him form his own opinion. —
1269:
Striking through, as I understand what AnonEMouse is saying now about sources
1138:
2204:
of the article. I discussed that further in length on the articles talk page.
1979:
783:
598:
This problem already has a solution: opinions which are not relevant, such as
356:
1223:
When you find an example of a band that has won a major award but for which
2007:- I do not agree that being of noble class makes him notable, however, the
1327:
per my last vote (if reasons for having received VM are given). Otherwise,
1162:
835:
2176:
1684:
Sorry, Proabivouac, it's not my department to post AfDs, never made one.
1121:
1085:
930:
721:
683:
635:
415:
337:
287:
261:
848:, confirms that Antoni was a Count (by listing the death of his wife).
757:
2404:
1646:
independent secondary source in it. Then we may talk about justice.
1602:
865:
826:
2372:". Since the coverage is trivial, the content could be merged into
2084:
that the article should be deleted unless more sources are found?
1426:
there was another one in this particular issue of New York Times?
481:
I'm neutral in terms of deletion. This bio is about a relative of
414:
encompasses the thousands of fifth-class Virtuti Militari awards.
2633:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1907:, subject is notable (royalty, recipient of medal of honor). --
2041:
VM (granted posthumously of course) was well deserved. Thanks!
68:
1561:
She's as entitled to make a case for notability as anyone. --
2360:
Knowledge (XXG). In the case of Antoni Dunin, there's not a
99:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments,
89:
among Knowledge (XXG) contributors. Knowledge (XXG) has
2433:
1) There wasnt any "short notice". The article had been
1620:
Ref 1 is too trivial. Ref 6 is about his father-in-law.
2455:
2434:
2273:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject_Military_history#Notability
1921:
690:, the lack of secondary sources is a serious problem.
239:
235:
231:
1189:
The problem with Antoni is that without a significant
929:, but that is an issue outside the scope of this AFD.
1331:
into Dunin family article. Certainly don't delete.--
749:
Delete, without prejudice, and encourage someone to
426:. I believe if you refer to the information on the
196:
Articles for deletion/Antoni Dunin (2nd nomination)
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1974:in the 1922 painting ..." as well as "great-niece
2611:addition: lots of people have worked hard on it,
1528:Calm, please. This is a good faith nomination. --
1125:alone is not sufficient for notability. The term
2643:). No further edits should be made to this page.
2461:more distinctive an accolade than I thought....
682:. I'm influenced by the argument given above by
465:written articles about them on Knowledge (XXG).
2057:per Elonka's long posts and Trippz's points. —
1789:This isn't about fame. It's about notability.
1588:due to lack of independent secondary sources.
1863:lack of verifiable sources as to notability.
119:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected
8:
720:even including the genelogical materials.
93:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
794:per nom- no evidence of any notability.--
2305:: This debate has been included in the
1354:: This debate has been included in the
776:: This debate has been included in the
113:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
1157:, who himself had been tutor to Prince
860:confirms the title of Antoni's father,
816:Knowledge (XXG):Centralized discussions
634:, and do not propose deletion of them.
188:
2374:List of recipients of Virtuti Militari
2355:Notability is established by multiple
2316:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
2238:List of recipients of Virtuti Militari
2011:decoration does seem to help meet the
1809:List of recipients of Virtuti Militari
1365:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
1335:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
867:And I have a 1947 letter from Senator
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
844:obituary of Antoni's father-in-law,
2366:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (people)
2292:seems to meet notability criteria.
187:
2307:list of Military-related deletions
2185:and worthy of being remembered. -
837:A document about his cavalry unit.
778:list of Military-related deletions
260:; apparently created by relative.
191:Articles for deletion/Antoni Dunin
24:
1601:Independent secondary source is
1356:list of Poland-related deletions
1246:Perikles Pierrakos-Mavromichalis
72:
1187:Polish Biographical Dictionary.
1060:have an article, only that we
857:Polish Biographical Dictionary
1:
2364:non-trivial reliable source.
1642:article and find me at least
1084:Thatcher has said that " the
109:on the part of others and to
2376:as some have suggested. --
1402:(I have the pdf right here).
716:I think this article flunks
2626:02:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
2603:22:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2581:18:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2543:20:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2525:20:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2509:20:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2499:19:23, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2482:18:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2473:18:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2448:18:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2429:18:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2412:17:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2398:17:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2381:17:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2347:17:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2327:17:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2297:08:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2285:08:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2262:07:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2245:05:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2229:04:23, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2213:21:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
2190:02:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
2180:16:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
2155:16:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
2139:06:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
2108:21:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
2089:06:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
2072:05:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
2046:14:19, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
2025:05:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
2000:04:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
1983:21:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1976:of the man who would become
1961:21:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1950:05:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
1927:21:46, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1912:21:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1898:21:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1868:20:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1856:19:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1842:17:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1820:17:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1794:17:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1785:17:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1765:10:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1752:23:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1725:23:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1713:22:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1689:23:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1680:23:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1668:23:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1651:23:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1634:22:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1625:22:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1614:22:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1593:21:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1579:12:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
1566:21:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1557:20:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1533:21:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1524:21:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1510:20:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1476:20:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1454:22:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1444:21:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1437:Image:Werner 1945-11-17.pdf
1431:20:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1417:20:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1407:20:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1390:20:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1376:18:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1346:18:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1320:18:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1291:19:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1261:18:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1232:18:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1219:18:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1199:18:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1175:17:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1114:12:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1069:18:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1051:18:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1015:18:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
975:14:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
954:12:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
934:07:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
903:05:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
807:23:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
787:23:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
766:21:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
740:21:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
725:21:07, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
708:21:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
695:21:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
661:21:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
648:21:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
639:21:07, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
623:21:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
610:20:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
590:20:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
574:20:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
552:19:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
518:19:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
498:19:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
470:19:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
453:17:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
436:17:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
419:19:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
395:19:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
372:19:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
360:18:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
341:19:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
328:18:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
310:18:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
295:18:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
278:18:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
265:18:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
58:03:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
2660:
1931:I think you're failing to
1119:I agree that simply being
2407:of 10,000 other names. --
2226:I did "That's hot" first!
1576:I did "That's hot" first!
2636:Please do not modify it.
2294:Biofoundationsoflanguage
2017:Order of the White Eagle
32:Please do not modify it.
2457:) that makes his award
1149:, Papal Chamberlain to
965:if what you really mean
151:; accounts blocked for
121:single-purpose accounts
91:policies and guidelines
871:to Secretary of State
383:) are notable per se.
186:AfDs for this article:
2333:Note to closing admin
680:WP:MILHIST#Notability
1250:Telemachos Karakalos
1236:We have articles on
367:- per notability. --
1710:Hit bull, win steak
1673:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
877:Alfred Niezychowski
103:by counting votes.
82:not a majority vote
2080:So you agree with
2005:Keep, w/ condition
1720:Will try. Thanks!
1311:. Subject passes
1159:August Czartoryski
1155:Raphael Kalinowski
579:Table the question
2601:
2329:
2310:
2283:
2240:made some sense.
1933:assume good faith
1421:All right, let's
1378:
1359:
1242:Olympic medalists
781:
572:
256:Does not satisfy
184:
183:
180:
107:assume good faith
2651:
2638:
2597:
2534:could also be: "
2523:
2497:
2471:
2427:
2396:
2345:
2324:
2322:
2311:
2301:
2279:
2257:
2209:
2137:
2043:greg park avenue
2009:Virtuti Militari
1889:
1879:Légion d'honneur
1853:greg park avenue
1829:, probably into
1783:
1776:
1749:greg park avenue
1722:greg park avenue
1686:greg park avenue
1648:greg park avenue
1611:greg park avenue
1554:
1549:
1546:
1516:Eli Thomas Reich
1508:
1501:
1492:Eli Thomas Reich
1451:greg park avenue
1428:greg park avenue
1387:greg park avenue
1373:
1371:
1360:
1350:
1343:
1341:
1325:Conditional keep
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1217:
1139:1933 wedding pic
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1013:
823:Virtuti Militari
804:
801:
798:
772:
763:
700:Question/comment
568:
548:
547:
546:
545:
544:
451:
428:Virtuti Militari
408:Virtuti Militari
393:
381:Virtuti Militari
247:
229:
178:
166:
150:
134:
115:
85:, but instead a
76:
69:
55:
34:
2659:
2658:
2654:
2653:
2652:
2650:
2649:
2648:
2647:
2641:deletion review
2634:
2595:Septentrionalis
2514:
2488:
2462:
2418:
2387:
2336:
2325:
2320:
2314:
2255:
2207:
2136:
2122:
2104:
2068:
1946:
1909:AndyFinkenstadt
1887:
1831:Dunin (surname)
1781:
1772:
1552:
1547:
1544:
1506:
1497:
1484:
1374:
1369:
1363:
1344:
1339:
1333:
1281:
1279:
1277:
1275:
1273:
1208:
1104:
1102:
1100:
1098:
1096:
1004:
927:local bar bands
873:George Marshall
802:
799:
796:
758:
542:
540:
538:
536:
534:
442:
384:
220:
204:
201:
168:
156:
140:
124:
111:sign your posts
67:
53:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2657:
2655:
2646:
2645:
2629:
2628:
2605:
2583:
2570:
2569:
2568:
2567:
2566:
2565:
2564:
2563:
2562:
2561:
2560:
2559:
2558:
2557:
2556:
2555:
2554:
2553:
2552:
2551:
2550:
2549:
2548:
2547:
2546:
2545:
2350:
2349:
2330:
2313:
2299:
2287:
2264:
2247:
2231:
2215:
2197:
2196:
2195:
2194:
2193:
2192:
2168:Medal of Honor
2158:
2157:
2141:
2126:
2115:
2114:
2113:
2112:
2111:
2110:
2102:
2075:
2074:
2066:
2051:
2050:
2049:
2048:
2028:
2027:
2002:
1995:begin with...
1988:
1987:
1986:
1985:
1963:
1954:
1953:
1952:
1944:
1915:
1914:
1901:
1900:
1883:Medal of Honor
1871:
1870:
1858:
1845:
1844:
1823:
1822:
1801:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1797:
1796:
1745:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1727:
1706:
1705:
1698:
1697:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1682:
1670:
1638:OK, go to the
1627:
1617:
1616:
1596:
1595:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1568:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1526:
1483:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1409:
1393:
1392:
1379:
1362:
1348:
1332:
1322:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1302:
1301:
1300:
1299:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1180:
1179:
1178:
1177:
1147:Jan Czarnowski
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1053:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1017:
989:Pulitzer prize
980:
979:
978:
977:
957:
956:
939:
938:
937:
936:
906:
905:
869:Homer Ferguson
842:New York Times
809:
789:
769:
768:
745:
744:
743:
742:
727:
711:
710:
697:
666:
665:
664:
663:
653:
652:
651:
650:
627:
626:
625:
613:
612:
593:
592:
576:
555:
523:
522:
521:
520:
501:
500:
475:
474:
473:
472:
459:
458:
457:
456:
455:
398:
397:
374:
362:
346:
345:
344:
343:
331:
330:
312:
297:
280:
254:
253:
200:
199:
198:
193:
185:
182:
181:
77:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2656:
2644:
2642:
2637:
2631:
2630:
2627:
2624:
2623:
2620:
2614:
2609:
2606:
2604:
2600:
2596:
2591:
2587:
2584:
2582:
2579:
2575:
2572:
2571:
2544:
2541:
2537:
2533:
2528:
2527:
2526:
2522:
2519:
2518:
2512:
2511:
2510:
2507:
2502:
2501:
2500:
2496:
2493:
2492:
2485:
2484:
2483:
2480:
2476:
2475:
2474:
2470:
2467:
2466:
2460:
2456:
2453:
2452:
2451:
2450:
2449:
2446:
2441:
2436:
2432:
2431:
2430:
2426:
2423:
2422:
2415:
2414:
2413:
2410:
2406:
2401:
2400:
2399:
2395:
2392:
2391:
2384:
2383:
2382:
2379:
2375:
2371:
2367:
2363:
2358:
2354:
2353:
2352:
2351:
2348:
2344:
2341:
2340:
2334:
2331:
2328:
2323:
2317:
2308:
2304:
2300:
2298:
2295:
2291:
2288:
2286:
2282:
2278:
2277:Major Bonkers
2274:
2271:
2268:
2265:
2263:
2259:
2258:
2251:
2248:
2246:
2243:
2242:Pascal.Tesson
2239:
2235:
2232:
2230:
2227:
2224:
2219:
2216:
2214:
2211:
2210:
2202:
2199:
2198:
2191:
2188:
2183:
2182:
2181:
2178:
2174:
2169:
2165:
2162:
2161:
2160:
2159:
2156:
2153:
2149:
2145:
2142:
2140:
2135:
2132:
2129:
2125:
2120:
2117:
2116:
2109:
2105:
2099:
2096:
2092:
2091:
2090:
2087:
2083:
2079:
2078:
2077:
2076:
2073:
2069:
2063:
2060:
2056:
2053:
2052:
2047:
2044:
2040:
2036:
2032:
2031:
2030:
2029:
2026:
2023:
2018:
2014:
2010:
2006:
2003:
2001:
1998:
1993:
1990:
1989:
1984:
1981:
1977:
1973:
1969:
1964:
1962:
1959:
1955:
1951:
1947:
1941:
1938:
1934:
1930:
1929:
1928:
1925:
1922:
1919:
1918:
1917:
1916:
1913:
1910:
1906:
1903:
1902:
1899:
1896:
1893:
1890:
1884:
1880:
1876:
1873:
1872:
1869:
1866:
1862:
1859:
1857:
1854:
1850:
1847:
1846:
1843:
1840:
1836:
1832:
1828:
1825:
1824:
1821:
1818:
1815:
1810:
1806:
1803:
1802:
1795:
1792:
1788:
1787:
1786:
1780:
1777:
1775:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1763:
1759:
1756:
1755:
1754:
1753:
1750:
1747:
1743:
1741:
1738:
1728:
1726:
1723:
1719:
1718:
1717:
1716:
1715:
1714:
1711:
1704:
1700:
1699:
1690:
1687:
1683:
1681:
1678:
1674:
1671:
1669:
1666:
1662:
1659:was kept, so
1658:
1654:
1653:
1652:
1649:
1645:
1641:
1637:
1636:
1635:
1632:
1628:
1626:
1623:
1619:
1618:
1615:
1612:
1608:
1607:Rolling Stone
1604:
1600:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1594:
1591:
1587:
1584:
1580:
1577:
1574:
1569:
1567:
1564:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1555:
1550:
1541:
1538:
1534:
1531:
1527:
1525:
1522:
1517:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1505:
1502:
1500:
1493:
1489:
1486:
1485:
1482:Section break
1481:
1477:
1474:
1470:
1467:
1466:
1455:
1452:
1447:
1446:
1445:
1442:
1438:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1429:
1424:
1420:
1419:
1418:
1415:
1410:
1408:
1405:
1401:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1394:
1391:
1388:
1383:
1380:
1377:
1372:
1366:
1357:
1353:
1349:
1347:
1342:
1336:
1330:
1326:
1323:
1321:
1318:
1314:
1310:
1307:
1306:
1293:
1292:
1289:
1288:
1268:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1259:
1255:
1254:Louis Glineux
1251:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1234:
1233:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1216:
1213:
1212:
1206:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1197:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1176:
1173:
1170:
1167:
1163:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1144:
1143:Edward Werner
1140:
1135:
1132:
1128:
1124:
1123:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1112:
1111:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1080:
1079:
1070:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1054:
1052:
1049:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1016:
1012:
1009:
1008:
1002:
997:
994:
993:Olympic medal
990:
986:
985:
984:
983:
982:
981:
976:
973:
970:
966:
961:
960:
959:
958:
955:
952:
948:
944:
941:
940:
935:
932:
928:
923:
919:
915:
910:
909:
908:
907:
904:
901:
898:
895:
890:
886:
882:
878:
874:
870:
866:
863:
859:
858:
853:
850:
847:
846:Edward Werner
843:
839:
836:
832:
827:
824:
820:
817:
813:
810:
808:
805:
793:
790:
788:
785:
779:
775:
771:
770:
767:
764:
761:
754:
752:
747:
746:
741:
738:
733:
728:
726:
723:
719:
715:
714:
713:
712:
709:
706:
701:
698:
696:
693:
689:
685:
681:
676:
671:
668:
667:
662:
659:
655:
654:
649:
646:
642:
641:
640:
637:
633:
628:
624:
621:
617:
616:
615:
614:
611:
608:
605:
601:
597:
596:
595:
594:
591:
588:
584:
580:
577:
575:
571:
567:
563:
559:
556:
554:
553:
550:
549:
528:
525:
524:
519:
516:
513:
509:
505:
504:
503:
502:
499:
496:
494:
492:
488:
484:
480:
477:
476:
471:
468:
463:
460:
454:
450:
447:
446:
439:
438:
437:
434:
429:
425:
422:
421:
420:
417:
413:
409:
405:
402:
401:
400:
399:
396:
392:
389:
388:
382:
378:
375:
373:
370:
366:
363:
361:
358:
355:
351:
348:
347:
342:
339:
335:
334:
333:
332:
329:
326:
325:
320:
316:
313:
311:
308:
305:
301:
298:
296:
293:
289:
284:
281:
279:
276:
272:
269:
268:
267:
266:
263:
259:
251:
245:
241:
237:
233:
228:
224:
219:
215:
211:
207:
203:
202:
197:
194:
192:
189:
176:
172:
164:
160:
154:
148:
144:
138:
132:
128:
122:
118:
114:
112:
108:
102:
98:
97:
92:
88:
84:
83:
78:
75:
71:
70:
65:
62:
60:
59:
56:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
2635:
2632:
2617:
2607:
2589:
2585:
2573:
2535:
2516:
2490:
2464:
2458:
2420:
2389:
2369:
2361:
2356:
2338:
2332:
2302:
2289:
2269:
2266:
2253:
2249:
2233:
2217:
2206:
2200:
2163:
2143:
2123:
2118:
2054:
2038:
2004:
1991:
1975:
1972:immortalized
1971:
1967:
1904:
1886:
1874:
1865:MarkinBoston
1860:
1848:
1835:Rodryg Dunin
1826:
1804:
1773:
1757:
1744:
1740:Antoni Dunin
1736:
1734:
1707:
1657:Antoni Dunin
1643:
1585:
1539:
1498:
1487:
1468:
1399:
1381:
1351:
1328:
1324:
1308:
1271:
1270:
1265:
1237:
1224:
1210:
1190:
1186:
1151:Pope Pius XI
1126:
1120:
1094:
1093:
1089:ethnic Poles
1081:
1061:
1057:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1006:
995:
964:
942:
888:
881:Antoni Dunin
862:Rodryg Dunin
855:
841:
811:
791:
773:
759:
748:
699:
675:Antoni Dunin
669:
599:
578:
557:
532:
531:
526:
507:
478:
461:
444:
423:
403:
386:
376:
364:
349:
322:
314:
299:
282:
270:
255:
206:Antoni Dunin
174:
162:
153:sockpuppetry
146:
135:; suspected
130:
116:
104:
100:
94:
86:
80:
64:Antoni Dunin
45:
43:
31:
28:
2357:non-trivial
2208:Wikidudeman
1997:EnsRedShirt
1924:Proabivouac
1665:Proabivouac
1661:StandWithUs
1640:StandWithUs
1631:Proabivouac
1521:Thatcher131
1473:Proabivouac
1441:Thatcher131
1435:Please see
1414:Thatcher131
1404:Proabivouac
1382:Strong keep
1229:Thatcher131
1196:Thatcher131
1191:independent
1145:; niece of
1066:Proabivouac
922:WP:NOT#NEWS
914:WP:NOT#INFO
737:Thatcher131
583:User:Elonka
483:User:Elonka
467:Thatcher131
354:Thatcher131
292:Thatcher131
2599:PMAnderson
2124:*Vendetta*
1609:magazine?
1563:AnonEMouse
1530:AnonEMouse
1317:Burntsauce
1258:AnonEMouse
918:WP:NOT#DIR
692:EdJohnston
688:WP:MILHIST
658:AnonEMouse
87:discussion
2234:Weak keep
2218:Weak keep
2201:Weak keep
2187:Jehochman
2152:Jehochman
1037:must have
645:Philwelch
620:Philwelch
587:Philwelch
143:canvassed
137:canvassed
96:consensus
2103:contribs
2095:Disavian
2067:contribs
2059:Disavian
1968:szlachta
1945:contribs
1937:Disavian
1256:, ... --
1238:hundreds
1127:szlachta
1122:szlachta
1086:szlachta
1041:only way
943:Question
705:LaMenta3
566:Tony Fox
324:MastCell
288:szlachta
250:View log
175:username
169:{{subst:
163:username
157:{{subst:
147:username
141:{{subst:
131:username
125:{{subst:
2619:Deckill
2368:says: "
2256:pd_THOR
2223:Mike H.
2164:Comment
2144:Comment
2086:Epbr123
1992:Comment
1958:Epbr123
1881:or the
1849:Comment
1805:Comment
1791:Epbr123
1774:ALKIVAR
1677:Epbr123
1622:Epbr123
1590:Epbr123
1573:Mike H.
1499:ALKIVAR
1267:source?
1205:WP:BAND
1082:Comment
1001:WP:BAND
883:passes
831:be bold
812:Comment
762:usten
670:Delete.
508:ignored
479:Comment
424:Comment
404:Comment
275:Quatloo
223:protect
218:history
139:users:
2578:ugen64
2574:Delete
2540:Matt57
2521:scribe
2506:Matt57
2495:scribe
2479:Matt57
2469:scribe
2445:Matt57
2435:tagged
2425:scribe
2409:Matt57
2394:scribe
2378:Matt57
2362:single
2343:scribe
2281:(talk)
2173:WP:BIO
2148:WP:BIO
2134:edits)
2128:(whois
2119:Delete
2082:Trippz
2022:Trippz
2013:WP:BIO
1892:Halibu
1861:Delete
1839:Haukur
1817:(talk)
1814:Friday
1758:Delete
1586:Delete
1540:Delete
1469:Delete
1423:Elonka
1400:at all
1313:WP:BIO
1215:scribe
1048:(talk)
1045:Friday
1011:scribe
991:or an
972:(talk)
969:Friday
951:Trippz
947:WP:BIO
889:weaker
885:WP:BIO
825:medal.
792:Delete
751:userfy
718:WP:BIO
632:WP:BIO
607:(talk)
604:Friday
570:(arf!)
562:WP:BIO
558:Delete
527:Delete
515:(talk)
512:Friday
491:Eliz81
487:WP:ANI
449:scribe
412:WP:BIO
391:scribe
365:Delete
350:Delete
319:WP:BIO
315:Delete
307:(talk)
304:Friday
300:Delete
271:Delete
258:WP:BIO
227:delete
2590:Merge
2532:award
2459:a lot
2321:talk
1980:Danny
1827:Merge
1762:Giano
1370:talk
1340:talk
1329:merge
1033:makes
834:home.
784:Carom
433:Shell
357:Danny
283:Hmmm.
244:views
236:watch
232:links
117:Note:
54:desat
16:<
2613:WP:N
2608:Keep
2588:(or
2586:Keep
2440:said
2405:list
2303:Note
2290:keep
2267:Keep
2250:Keep
2131:talk
2055:Keep
2039:this
2035:here
1905:Keep
1875:Keep
1603:here
1488:Keep
1352:Note
1309:Keep
1282:UBT•
1105:UBT•
1058:must
920:and
916:and
854:The
840:The
774:Note
732:here
543:UBT•
462:Note
377:Keep
352:per
240:logs
214:talk
210:edit
50:Core
46:keep
2517:WjB
2491:WjB
2465:WjB
2421:WjB
2390:WjB
2339:WjB
2309:.
2270:per
2177:THF
2175:?
1833:or
1737:our
1644:one
1548:non
1545:Bru
1361:--
1358:.
1278:ILL
1240:of
1211:WjB
1101:ILL
1062:can
1007:WjB
931:THF
803:gle
800:rin
797:Sef
782:--
780:.
722:THF
684:THF
636:THF
600:any
539:ILL
445:WjB
431:II.
416:THF
387:WjB
369:Tom
338:THF
262:THF
248:– (
171:csp
167:or
159:csm
127:spa
101:not
2622:er
2260:|
2106:)
2070:)
1948:)
1895:tt
1888://
1675:.
1553:ia
1439:.
1280:DO
1274:•C
1252:,
1248:,
1225:no
1172:ka
1169:on
1166:El
1103:DO
1097:•C
996:is
900:ka
897:on
894:El
892:--
564:.
541:DO
535:•C
321:.
242:|
238:|
234:|
230:|
225:|
221:|
216:|
212:|
177:}}
165:}}
155::
149:}}
133:}}
123::
2318:|
2312:—
2100:/
2097:(
2064:/
2061:(
1942:/
1939:(
1782:☢
1779:™
1701:[
1507:☢
1504:™
1367:|
1337:|
1276:H
1137:(
1099:H
864:.
760:j
753:.
537:H
252:)
246:)
208:(
179:.
173:|
161:|
145:|
129:|
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
