Deletion of Werner Doehner

Comment:  is NOT a stand-alone  - it's very clear what it says the means for resolving a  situation are and they do not include deletion, but are merge/rename/redirect (and then, not in all cases). The only reason why  should lead to deletion is where the event to which you'd otherwise merge/rename/redirect is itself not notable, or there is nothing to merge, or the redirect is not plausible - and in each case there is another policy that is failed
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DELREASON||WP:BLP1E||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: This was really challenging. It's true that the only reason Doehner was notable was because he survived the Hindenberg (): {{tq|When the role played by an individual in the event is less significant, an independent article may not be needed, and a redirect is appropriate.}} However, there is extensive significant coverage (not reflected in the article, but exists) both over the years and now on his death. I've gone back and forth between  and  and . I finally narrowed it down to this part of : {{tq|'''The significance of''' an event or '''the individual's role is indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources'''.}} In this case, significant coverage was persistent over the years, particularly as other survivors died until he was the last one. Multiple highly-respected sources consider his role significant, even though his "role" was simply continuing to live. So, I say we should keep it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:1E||WP:GNG||WP:1E||WP:BLP1E||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: based on the cogent arguments of {{U|FOARP}} and {{U|Schazjmd}}, and because |we tend to keep such "List_of_last_survivors_of_historical_events|last survivor" articles (|although this consensus could change
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:OUTCOMES||WP:CCC)