Deletion of André Diedericks

Comment: per nom. No significant coverages to |reliable sources that establish the subject notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: First let me remind interested editors in the subject of this article of  & . Please do not make comments about fellow editors, and |assume good faith. Attacking fellow editors does nothing to advance the shared purpose of improving this project/Wikipedia. That being said, I have not come across any |significant coverage of the subject in |tertiary sources provided in the article (which as mentioned above has been edited multiple times since this AfD began), to indicate that the subject meets . As mentioned by other editors, since the highest medal for valour in South Africa during the subjects service period was divided into multiple grades, and as the subject was never awarded the highest of those grades, or the second highest of those grades multiple times, medals alone are insufficient for the subject to pass notability per . Now the only reason why I am not saying strait delete, but weak delete, is because of |the non-english language tertiary sources that might exist that give significant coverage of the subject. However, as I have not seen any presented that are readily available to other editors, I cannot support keeping this article at this time
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Civility (WP:CIVIL||WP:NPA||WP:AGF||WP:SIGCOV||WP:PSTS||WP:GNG||WP:SOLDIER||WP:BIAS)

Comment: I think the combination of his coverage in the sources, his decorations and his senior rank within special forces (although neither of the latter two on their own meet ) do just about (and it's still very close) scrape him past the notability bar. However, I would like to add that the attacks on the nominator for what was a perfectly sensible nomination at the time it was made have been unacceptable. It is also inaccurate to suggest that because the HC is split into four grades ''all'' those grades constitute the highest level. Rubbish. The Order of the British Empire is split into six grades, yet we only consider the top three to confer inherent notability. Same with the French Légion d'honneur. Different grades of a multi-grade honour are effectively different awards. There should be no special pleading for countries that choose to have a split award instead of separate awards, nor for countries that choose not to award their top awards, as long as those awards exist on paper. Even discounting the latter (and there's no real reason why we should), Diedericks effectively held a second-level and a third-level bravery award, which is not generally sufficient for notability under  (there are thousands of British (and WWI and WWII South African!) servicemen, for instance, with the DSO and MC, DCM and MM etc who do not and should not have articles). He also held two merit decorations which appear to be pretty far down the list. As I said, it's a ''very'' weak keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SOLDIER||WP:SOLDIER)

Comment: Whether this should be ''delete'' or ''weak delete'' isn't that important; the reasoning is the key. It's always hard when dealing with someone who was heroic, or achieved great things -- but to be blunt about, that has no direct impact on whether the person will be included in Wikipedia. I tend to agree with {{noping|RightCowLeftCoast}}. First, looking at |general guidelines, I don't see independent, in-depth coverage. With respect to , it may be unfortunate his country chose not to award him the highest award, but that's what happened. Could there be sources not in English? Possibly, be we need some proof. I've spent a little time searching, but without success. Lacking that proof, the article should be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:SOLDIER)