Talk:Joachim Wandel/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Joachim Wandel. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Notability

Does not meet WP:SOLDIER & sig RS coverage not found, just a few name checks: link. No de.wiki article.

Please also see a note at MilHist Talk Archives for background behind the redirect. In summary, per the outcome of the discussion at Notability:People on notability of Knight's Cross recipients: permalink, certain recipients were deemed non notable and WP:SOLDIER has been modified accordingly: diff. The articles of these recipients are being redirected to alphabetical lists. K.e.coffman (talk) 11:25, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Notable due to his status as a Flying ace with a high claimed kills counts. As you can see in List of World War II flying aces - flyers with a much smaller kill count have articles - with the notability being their kill count and nothing else. Being an aerial ace (with a significant count for a particular conflict - 5 would be borderline for WWII, but would confer significance in any other conflict - mid-double digits and up for WWII is clearly significant). notable per SOLDIER: " Played an important role in a significant military event such as a major battle or campaign" - kill counts of these magnitude are a significant material and personnel (aviation - expensive to train) advantage.Icewhiz (talk) 10:18, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

B class. But please consider the following 2 sentences from the article. "On 7 October, Wandel claimed his 75th and last aerial victory ==B class review== when he shot down a Lavochkin-Gorbunov-Gudkov LaGG-3 fighter near Ostashkov. He was then shot down and killed in action with other Soviet LaGG-3 fighters." If he shot down a Soviet fighter, then was shot down and killed soon afterward, how could he claim anything? Or, could he have scored a victory in the morning, reported it, and then got killed in an afternoon sortie? If the sources aren't clear on how it was reported, then I suggest "claimed" be replaced by "was credited" in the first sentence. Djmaschek (talk) 02:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Reworded, thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)