The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:55, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Middendorf (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SOLDIER IMO - Don't see any evidence that he is particularly notable other than receiving the Leftwich tropy Gbawden (talk) 10:21, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. WP:SOLDIER is an essay, not a policy nor a guideline. WP:BASIC is a guideline which establishes that:

A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

Middendorf has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of him. Therefore, he is notable.

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 10:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ONLYESSAY. WP:SOLDIER documents well-established WP:CONSENSUS in this area. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:49, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I see that marinecorptimes.com and armytimes.com are the same article but differently badged. The airforcetimes.com is not visible but is by the same author. The militarytimes.com article is also by that author. This makes the claim for multiplicity of sources less certain. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually now I've looked again, that Military Times article is a excerpt from the marinescopstimes.com article. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's because marinecorpstimes.com, armytimes.com, and airforcetimes.com are all subsidiaries of the same parent company, Gannett Government Media, in the same way that CNN and Time are owned by Time-Warner, their parent company. They are still intellectually independent of each other as the guidelines establishes. If this is an issue we can easily provide more reliable sources such as [1] (the public domain article from which all other articles are based), [2] from Post-Bulletin, the largest evening newspaper in Minnesota, and the largest daily newspaper in Southeastern Minnesota, and [3] from KTTC. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 12:37, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think those other sources will be needed. The "editorial" listing for each oft he websites has the same names. GraemeLeggett (talk) 16:00, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 12:41, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 12:41, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I don't dispute that military newspapers and magazines are going to mention the person concerned - but at the same time they will mention thousands of sailors and soldiers - none of whom may meet WP:SOLDIER. Gbawden (talk) 12:53, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or possibly redirect to Leftwich Trophy. Seems like a case of WP:BLP1E to me, that being winning the Leftwich. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:22, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about that as well but then you have his appearance in the National Geographic documentary, Battleground Afghanistan, in which he was given considerable camera time and focus. So in this case it would be the trophy + his appearance in the documentary. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 20:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Non-notable junior officer who has received an obscure trophy. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:32, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would not consider an award personally selected by the Commandant of the Marine Corps and nominated by fellow company commanders as "obscure". I would also not consider Middendorf "non-notable" per this rationale and his appearance in the documentary. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 20:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An obscure award for the majority of readers, though not necessarily within the Corps. Unfortunately, the Leftwich Trophy seems under-referenced with respect to the General notability guideline - of the references and external links given all bar one are from USMC websites. GraemeLeggett (talk) 21:36, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's obscure. It might be known within the USMC, but it's basically just a prize. Prizes are awarded by organisations all over the world. They have to be pretty damn significant for their recipients to be automatically notable. After all, we only consider recipients of a country's top decoration for gallantry to be automatically notable, not any lesser (but still a lot more notable than this) awards. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:03, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:BLP1E. Notability is not established here. Nick-D (talk) 10:29, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete / redirect per WP:BLP1E. Someone not using his real name (talk) 03:40, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I should add that the best encyclopedic approach here is to write an article about Operation Lariat. Someone not using his real name (talk) 05:08, 31 July 2013 (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.