Björn Engwall: Kleuske ( talk ) 10:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Sweden .  Kleuske ( talk ) 10:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete An unhelpful nomination, but Engwall's military career would appear not to contain any substantive claim to notability.  The award of the Order of the Sword, a blue-linked award, gave pause for thought, but that award's article makes the perhaps salient point that it is "Awarded to officers, and originally intended as an award for bravery and particularly long or useful service, it eventually became a more or less obligatory award for military officers after a certain number of years in service."  Obligatory award apart, there is no reason for notability - and no RS or independent coverage - and so he does, indeed, fail WP:GNG.  Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 14:48, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Commander 1st Class of the Order of the Sword clearly qualifies per WP:ANYBIO #1.  It's the second highest grade of the order, probably equivalent to a knighthood in British terms given it comes with a breast star.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 10:36, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I agree with Necrothesp above.  Although the lower ranks of this order were handed out quite frequently by the 1960s, the Commander of the 1st Class is another, much more exclusive matter.  / FredrikT ( talk ) 16:46, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG .  On the WP:ANYBIO #1 argument I agree with Alexandermcnabb, 2nd highest tier of 2nd highest decoration doesn't satisfy "well-known and significant award or honor".  Mztourist ( talk ) 04:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I'm unable to find WP:GNG passing coverage.  With regard to Order of the Sword , I'll just note that this happened almost immediately before the order was paused based on, among others, the following reasoning (deepl translation from sv:Ordensreformen ): [By 1960s and 1970s,] the number of appointments to the orders had gradually increased considerably.  In 1971 there were 1,240 appointments to the orders, of which 900 were within the Order of the North Star, and the total number of order holders in 1973 was estimated at just over 24,000.  This was very high in comparison with, for example, Denmark, where about 200 decorations were awarded annually, and Norway only about 60.[8] Large categories of citizens who were eligible for an order under the current system also declined to receive one.  This was interpreted as meaning that the order system had lost its function of expressing appreciation of citizens' achievements and that there was no longer any basis for state involvement in order matters[9].  [..] It was therefore proposed that no Swedish citizens should no longer be awarded the royal orders, that the Order of the Sword and the Order of Vasa should be laid to rest, and that the Order of the Seraphim and the Order of the North Star should only be available to the royal family.  The decision was confirmed and the system ended on January 1, 1975.  This kind of analysis, from the Swedish state itself, extremely discounts the awards for the purposes of WP:ANYBIO #1.- Ljleppan ( talk ) 08:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  It is very clear that the delete voters above have no understanding whatsoever of how European honours systems work and the differences between level of an order and grade within the order.  The second highest grade of the second highest order is generally higher than the third highest grade of the highest order.  It's the grade that's important, not the precedence of the order.  The lower grades of the order (which are what were given out so freely in this case) are not notable, but grades at this level are.  It's for this reason that editors without knowledge of the subject claim that even the lowest members of the Légion d'Honneur must be notable, as it is France's most prestigious order, and conversely that Knights Commander of the Order of the British Empire can't be notable as it is Britain's eighth highest order.  Both are utterly wrong.  Knowledge of the subject is always helpful in assessing notability.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 14:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That does rather come across as a bit snooty.  I'm sure @ Ljleppan could counter that as you aren't an expert in Finnish or Swedish language, culture or society that you aren't qualified to comment, either.  They're undoubtedly bigger than that, which is nice, but it would be just as valid (or invalid) an argument.  And I'm afraid that neither washes when we depend on the consensus of The Great Unwashed - few of us are subject matter experts, but we are all informed by guidelines set through a process of consensus and if that ain't perfect, well, it's going to just have to do.  Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 14:36, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I apologise if it does, but I've seen this particular argument too many times and it's irritating.  As well as being completely wrong.  Closers, who may well not have that knowledge either, need to be made aware when an argument is factually incorrect and take that into consideration rather than taking them at face value.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 15:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Necrothesp I find your comments condescending.  You continually push your own views of notability which other Users are perfectly entitled to disagree with.  You don't get to tell others that they lack knowledge or are wrong on these issues.  Mztourist ( talk ) 06:29, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Then don't make statements like: 2nd highest tier of 2nd highest decoration doesn't satisfy "well-known and significant award or honor".  Which does, I'm afraid, show a lack of understanding, as I pointed out.  I have no problem with being disagreed with (although you have shown in the past that you have a massive problem with it).  I do have a problem with editors making claims that are patently based on incorrect assumptions, which do need to be pointed out.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:03, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Then don't make statements like "It is very clear that the delete voters above have no understanding whatsoever of how European honours systems work" and "Closers, who may well not have that knowledge either, need to be made aware when an argument is factually incorrect ".  As usual with military biographies, you are reading far more into WP:ANYBIO #1 than what is written there, but as you have shown in the past you have your own vision (and lists) of notability which you do have a "problem with being disagreed with".  Mztourist ( talk ) 03:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Suggestion to @ Necrothesp - change the notability guidelines to clarify this issue for the future.  That will save you personal vexation and ensure proper outcomes at other AfDs.  Probably the best way to do this is to start with a conversation at WT:BIO , then, based on that, develop an RfC.  I would also notify the appropriate Wikiprojects (whichever ones deal with honors) when you start the conversation on the talk page.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 12:19, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -  Commander 1st Class of the Order of the Sword clearly qualifies per WP:ANYBIO #1.  And per WP:GNG.  BabbaQ ( talk ) 08:55, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ BabbaQ : what sources are you basing the per WP:GNG on?  Ljleppan ( talk ) 09:47, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  13:37, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus