Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Military

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts
Military history
WikiProject
Main project page + talk
News & open tasks
Academy
Core work areas
Assessment
Main page
 → A-Class FAQ
 → B-Class FAQ
 → A-Class review requests
 → Assessment requests
 → Current statistics
 → Review alert box
Contests
Main page
 → Contest entries
 → Scoring log archive
 → Scoreboard archive
Coordination
Main page + talk
 → Handbook
 → Bugle newsroom talk
 → ACM eligibility tracking
 → Discussion alert box
Incubator
Main page
 → Current groups and initiatives
Special projects
Majestic Titan talk
Member affairs
Membership
Full list talk
 → Active / Inactive
 → Userboxes
Awards
Main page talk
 →A-Class medals
 →A-Class crosses
 → WikiChevrons w/ Oak Leaves
Resources
Guidelines
Content
Notability
Style
Templates
Infoboxes
 → Command structure doc · talk
 → Firearm cartridge doc · talk
 → Military award doc · talk
 → Military conflict doc · talk
 → Military installation doc · talk
 → Military memorial doc · talk
 → Military person doc · talk
 → Military unit doc · talk
 → National military doc · talk
 → Military operation doc · talk
 → Service record doc · talk
 → Militant organization doc · talk
 → Weapon doc · talk
Navigation boxes doc · talk
 → Campaignboxes doc · talk
Project banner doc · talk
Announcement & task box
 → Discussion alert box
 → Review alert box
Template design style doc · talk
Showcase
Featured articles 1534
Featured lists 149
Featured topics 41
Featured pictures 570
Featured sounds 69
Featured portals 5
A-Class articles 685
A-Class lists 40
Good articles 5,645
Automated lists
Article alerts
Most popular articles
New articles
Nominations for deletion
Task forces
General topics
Fortifications
Intelligence
Maritime warfare
Military aviation
Military culture, traditions, and heraldry
Military biography
Military historiography
Military land vehicles
Military logistics and medicine
Military memorials and cemeteries
Military science, technology, and theory
National militaries
War films
Weaponry
Nations and regions
African military history
Asian military history
Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history
Balkan military history
Baltic states military history
British military history
Canadian military history
Chinese military history
Dutch military history
European military history
French military history
German military history
Indian military history
Italian military history
Japanese military history
Korean military history
Middle Eastern military history
Nordic military history
North American military history
Ottoman military history
Polish military history
Roman and Byzantine military history
Russian, Soviet and CIS military history
South American military history
South Asian military history
Southeast Asian military history
Spanish military history
United States military history
Periods and conflicts
Classical warfare
Medieval warfare
Early Muslim military history
Crusades
Early Modern warfare
Wars of the Three Kingdoms
American Revolutionary War
Napoleonic era
American Civil War
World War I
World War II
Cold War
Post-Cold War
Related projects
Blades
Espionage
Firearms
Pritzker Military Museum & Library
Piracy
Ships
edit · changes
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Military. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Military|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Military. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch

Military and combat

[edit]

Badge charity

[edit]
Badge charity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTDICT, as the article simply contains a definition for the term, along with a single source. JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 16:09, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vlora incident

[edit]
Vlora incident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:HOAXy framing as a battle when the Soviets simply withdrew under diplomatic pressure and harassment of their sailors. The most violence described in a recent news article is that an Albanian sailor tore a Soviet flag. [1] All the life.ru article cited here says is "портили имущество, каждый день скандалили с советскими моряками, провоцируя их на драки и ссоры и буквально гадили на крыльце комендатуры." ("they damaged property, quarreled with Soviet sailors every day, provoking them to fights and arguments, literally on the porch of the commandant's office.") The claim that Soviet vessels were fired upon is not to be found in the life.ru article and thus fails WP:V. Thus, I would conclude that this article is a kind of WP:SENSATIONAL WP:CFORK, and there is nothing about the Soviet's withdrawal that can't be adequately summarized at Albanian–Soviet split and Pasha Liman Base. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 13:29, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ambush near Cazin

[edit]
Ambush near Cazin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

One of countless clashes that took place during the Siege of Bihać (1992–1995). Fails WP:GNG, possibly a WP:HOAX given the framing as an ambush when the article describes it as an offensive that led to the capture of several villages. Adds nothing to readers' understanding of that siege or the wider war. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 12:59, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Governor Sheng (talk) 13:48, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle for Bosanski Brod

[edit]
Battle for Bosanski Brod (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:POVFORK of Operation Corridor 92. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 12:57, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Foča

[edit]
Operation Foča (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I fail to see why this was created when we already have Operation Trio. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 12:56, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Drënas

[edit]
Battle of Drënas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:POVFORK of Gornje Obrinje massacre, which took place in the same municipality at the same time. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 12:40, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Destruction of Israel in Iranian policy

[edit]
Destruction of Israel in Iranian policy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article looks like a recreation of the old article "Calls for the destruction of Israel", which was merged in January 2025 (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Calls for the destruction of Israel (2nd nomination)). This article might as well be called "Iranian calls for the destruction of Israel" and thus it has the same problems as the previous one – it is a WP:POVFORK of Legitimacy of the State of Israel. Propose merge just like the previous article. VR (Please ping on reply) 08:35, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose (creator). I respectfully disagree with the claim that this article is a "recreation" of anything. This article is focused on a different topic: it examines Iran's official policy and strategic posture toward the destruction of Israel, as characterized by a range of reliable secondary sources. It does not merely document rhetorical calls or statements made by various actors, but rather explores a long-term, very grounded policy, which includes several aspects: military doctrine, foreign relations, proxy activity, and nuclear strategy, all directed at eliminating Israel as a Jewish state. The content, sources, and framing are substantially different from the previous article, both in scope and intent. Therefore, it cannot be accurately described neither as a recreation nor as a POV fork. Rafi Chazon (talk) 08:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If it is about Iran's relations with Israel, why can it not be at Iran-Israel relations? Why the POV framing of what is a complex issue and involves antagonism on both sides? VR (Please ping on reply) 09:06, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm not disputing your whole argument, I just want to say that an article being very well researched and sourced isn't an inherent reason to keep and article if there's issues with it being an article in the first place. AssanEcho (talk) 11:28, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It’s not just that the article is well-researched and properly sourced. The focus here isn’t on rhetorical "calls", it's on a sustained strategy, policy, or project, however one chooses to label it. Iran's actions: funding and training militant groups to encircle Israel, promoting suicide bombings, advancing a nuclear program aimed at threatening Israel, and broadcasting countdowns to Israel's destruction, are not isolated statements. they are deliberate steps within a long-term vision. And this isn't my interpretation of course, it reflects the view of leading scholars. As Afshon Ostovar wrote in a 2024 Oxford University Press publication, "The goal of destroying Israel as a Jewish entity is a cornerstone of the Islamic Republic of Iran's regional strategy." This is clearly a notable topic, with enough coverage and depth to merit its own article. Rafi Chazon (talk) 11:37, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I was not commenting to dispute your argument though I have my own issues with it (You can read them on my multi merge reply), and to comment I do actually believe you and your sources that this a concrete goal of the Iranian Government. I was just mentioning that any article's high quality is not necessarily a reason to keep it in any AFD. AssanEcho (talk) 11:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This really does feel, based on the above, like a POV fork of Iran-Israel relations - @Rafi Chazon it's clear you put a lot of work into this and nobody is suggesting it's non-notable. It's just that the page that is specifically about the relationship between these two states is a better home for this material than a breakaway page with an eye-catching header. Simonm223 (talk) 11:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Merge This is an overly specific page. It should be merged into either Legitimacy of the State of Israel or Foreign relations of Iran where it would be more at home. Genabab (talk) 08:53, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I don’t see any reason to delete; the article seems both notable and detailed enough to stand on its own, with an appropriate link and summary in the general article. Jellyfish dave (talk) 08:56, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Legitimacy of the State of Israel. POVFORK. Gotitbro (talk) 09:08, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Personally, I think Vice Regent’s deletion of the article was completely out of line. As for the merits of the article itself, the scope is clear and well-defined. There’s a substantial body of reliable news reporting and academic literature that directly addresses this issue. It’s certainly notable — it’s a topic that has drawn the attention of numerous scholars and analysts, and it's clearly of interest within the broader body of literature.
    This article has encyclopaedic value, as it demonstrates that a single paragraph on the Iran–Israel relations page wouldn’t come close to adequately covering the subject. The article should be retained. I’d encourage editors to prioritise collaborative solutions rather than tearing down articles that can be improved. KiltedKangaroo (talk) 09:10, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Citation Publisher/Source Type
Ostovar, Afshon (2024). Wars of Ambition Oxford University Press Academic
Maloney, Suzanne (2024). "The Middle East's Dangerous New Normal" Foreign Affairs Notable / Expert Commentary
Karsh, Efraim (2023). "The Israel-Iran conflict" Israel Affairs (peer-reviewed journal) Academic
Reda, Latife (2016). "Origins of the Islamic Republic's Strategic Approaches" Middle East Critique Academic
Freilich, Charles David (2018). Israeli National Security Oxford University Press Academic
Erdbrink, Thomas (2015) The New York Times Reliable Media
"Iran: Khamenei to lead Friday prayers..." (2020) The Guardian Reliable Media
Pileggi, Tamar (2018) Times of Israel Reliable Media
"Iran's Khamenei says..." (2021) France 24 Reliable Media
"Iran leader says Israel a 'cancerous tumour'" (2020) The Economic Times Semi Reliable Media
"Iran's Khamenei tells visiting Hamas chief..." (2024) Times of Israel Reliable Media
"Iran president sees 'countdown' to Israel's end" (2007) Reuters Reliable Media
"Iran's Rouhani calls Israel a 'cancerous tumor'" Al Jazeera Reliable Media
"Iranian President Repeats Calls..." (2023) Iran International Reliable Media
Goldberg, Jeffrey (2015) The Atlantic Notable / Expert Commentary
Hafezi, Parisa (2023) Reuters Reliable Media
Said et al. (2023-2024) Wall Street Journal Reliable Media
"Hamas received weapons and training from Iran..." (2023) The Washington Post Reliable Media
Fassihi, Farnaz (2024) The New York Times Reliable Media
Allin, Dana H.; Simon, Steven (2010). The Sixth Crisis Oxford University Press Academic
Sharma, Anu (2022). Through the Looking Glass Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group Academic
Magen, Ze'ev (2023). Reading Revolutionary Iran De Gruyter Academic
Reda, Latife (2016). (duplicate entry) Middle East Critique Academic
"Iranian protesters unveil clock..." (2017) The Independent Reliable Media
Azizi, Arash (2025) The Atlantic Notable / Expert Commentary
"Iranians Criticize Quds Day's Futility..." (2024) Iran International Reliable Media
Shamir, Shlomo Chabad.org Niche Media
Here’s a list of sources. Hopefully, these references make a strong case for the article’s importance. Cheers! KiltedKangaroo (talk) 09:13, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify: no one is disputing this topic's WP:NOTABILITY, but rather it is a WP:POVFORK of an existing article.VR (Please ping on reply) 09:33, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And Comment But as an aside Vice regent if we're here to collaborate on an encyclopedia, consistency should be applied across Wikipedia and it shouldn't matter whether the article is pro-Israel or anti-Israel. But when things come down to a consensus or what not, this clearly isn't the case. There is a plethora of anti-Israel articles and I don't see people calling for merging them, deleting them or WP:POVFORK.I'm not accusing you of this - I'm saying this is a big picture zoomed out issue that needs to be address for the betterment of Wikipedia.MaskedSinger (talk) 09:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Iran–Israel relations. We don't need more POV forks and one just has to read the lead to see that POV fork a perfect description. Zerotalk 09:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Iran-Israel relations, of which it's a WP:POVFORK; possibly also move some stuff to Legitimacy of the State of Israel. The argument that we should "look at recent events" to show why this narrow subset of that article supposedly needs to be its own article also shows that this article's creation is a matter of WP:RECENTISM, but even then, Iran-Israel relations is a more neutral article to cover this sort of thing and no valid reasons have been presented for why we would spin off a more POV copy of it. All the presented sources would be more accurately and thoroughly examined at that article - most of them are not specifically about Iran calling for the destruction of Israel but are about Iran / Israeli relations more generally, which means pulling out just that part and trying to make an article about it without covering the rest is misusing them as sources. --Aquillion (talk) 10:00, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I agree with the previous editors here, mainly because this topic is way too broad and complex to squeeze into just a subsection of Iran–Israel relations or Legitimacy of the State of Israel. We're not just talking about rhetoric or ideology here – this covers military strategy, foreign policy, proxy wars, educational systems, and a whole lot more. Iran's approach to eliminating Israel is so systematic and institutional that it really deserves its own standalone article, especially given all the academic research and journalism we have on it. If we merge this somewhere else, readers won't get the full picture of how extensive and significant this issue actually is. Eliezer1987 (talk) 10:24, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I don't see why today, of all days, that article should be deleted. If anything, it should be expanded in order to provide even more background information.--Edelseider (talk) 10:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure why Israel attacking Iran equates to needing an independent article about Iran calling for an end to Israel when we already have Iran-Israel relations. This appears not to be a policy based reason to retain an article. Simonm223 (talk) 11:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This article presents a well-sourced, analytically distinct examination of Iranian state policy toward the destruction of Israel. Far from being a content fork, it addresses a clearly delineated and academically acknowledged phenomenon that spans military doctrine, proxy engagement, nuclear strategy, and ideological incitement. To reduce this topic to a subsection elsewhere would obscure its scope and scholarly relevance. At a time when Wikipedia must uphold its responsibility to present verifiable knowledge with intellectual integrity, removing such a page risks erasing a central dimension of contemporary Middle Eastern geopolitics and signals a troubling asymmetry in editorial standards. שלומית ליר (talk) 10:46, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Multi Merge Honestly I don't see much in this article that necessitates it be it's own article and not be merged in with Calls for the destruction of Israel, Iran-Israel relations, or even New antisemitism (as much as I personally don't care for the articles concept myself). This articled existence is smelling of recency bias due to the current catastrophe in the middle east, and while this doesn't have much to do with this topic it does seem to be mildly biased against Iran by not mentioning any international or internal support for the various actions, policies and intions (though I do believe 100% that every example of dissent and distain is real).
AssanEcho (talk) 11:08, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This article offers a well-documented and clearly focused analysis of Iran’s official policy aimed at the destruction of Israel. Merging this topic into a broader article would dilute its significance and obscure a distinct, long-standing pillar of Iranian state policy. The sustained calls for Israel’s destruction by Iran’s leadership, their integration into official doctrine, and their geopolitical consequences warrant focused, in-depth treatment that a subsection cannot adequately provide. This is not a minor aspect of Iranian politics—it is a central theme with global ramifications, deserving its own dedicated space for clarity, documentation, and analysis. Deletion would set a dangerous precedent of removing uncomfortable historical realities from Wikipedia simply because they are unpopular. Cfgauss77 (talk) 11:41, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No "uncomfortable historical realities" would be removed due to (un)popularity, or at least from what I can see I don't think anyone is suggesting that. Originalcola (talk) 17:01, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Nobody is suggesting that. Simonm223 (talk) 17:13, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

שלומית ליר and KiltedKangaroo Plantbaseddiet (talk) 12:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose nom & keep article The article's scope and content look pretty different from the previous. Also: this here separate article lets us have a deeper level of details/sources that can't be properly contented at the proposed merge target. Retain this well sourced article, which cannot be considered a fork, as its subject matter is highly specific. XavierItzm (talk) 15:30, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Iran-Israel relations and Legitimacy of Israel to avoid WP:POVFORK. The canvassing mentioned upthread is quite worrying. Lewisguile (talk) 15:42, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: Having gone through and edited this article significantly just now, I think it is essentially the same article as before the merge. It also has major problems. Some whole sections are/were sourced to a single writer, and this makes the POVfork issues worse. It's also an odd focus, when we do t usually focus on inter-state grievances in this sort of detail. Should we, for instance, have an article Israeli rhetoric on Iran? Or Al-Qaeda's policy on the destruction of America? Because that's currently what this feels like—a one-sided take on something that, while it's obviously true, is better placed within context elsewhere rather than feeling like it's written with an agenda. Lewisguile (talk) 17:36, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It is common, in cases where an AfD centers around a PoV fork to get a lot of editors saying they want to keep because the topic is notable. We know the topic is notable. Because there is a whole other article on it. Nobody wants to delete Iran-Israel relations. But, frankly, when Israel starts bombing a regional enemy and suddenly a POV fork appears that wants to assert that really it's the enemy's fault there's a pretty serious WP:NPOV concern that makes such a POV fork rather problematic. Reliable information should be retained on the appropriate destination page but this appears to be a POV push. Simonm223 (talk) 16:27, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Good point re: "notability". Lewisguile (talk) 17:30, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Iran–Israel relations - As in the previous discussion the issue here isn't notability, that really isn't in dispute. I don't think this article is a recreation of the previous article has severe NPOV issues as in the previous deletion, but I think it would be better served merged into this existing article especially since this topic is so intertwined with Iranian-Israeli relations. I don't know if this is a POVFORK but I don't think the article should stand either way. Originalcola (talk) 16:55, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Principal Staff Officer (Bangladesh)

[edit]
Principal Staff Officer (Bangladesh) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The infobox is not referenced at all (it does not contain any single reference about the information), the first Principal Staff Officer Brigadier General Abul Hasanat Md Abdullah's appointment date seems to be fake, Major General Nurul Islam Shishu's reference is not trustworthy. The Took Office and Left Office parts are not true, where are references regarding this? According to the official website of the Bangladeshi Armed Forces Division, the office was created in 1991, and Brigadier General Abul Hasanat Md Abdullah was the first Principal Staff Officer but when he was appointed it is not written there. Armed Forces Division's name was Commander-in-Chief's Secretariat and Supreme Command Headquarters and also Supreme Command Headquarters Division in the 1970s and 1980s decade. The article needs many authentic references regarding the appointees, their appointment dates (when they took office and when the left office), if many authentic references are not found it must be deleted. PauKau (talk) 01:12, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish-Syrian Border Clashes (1938)

[edit]
Turkish-Syrian Border Clashes (1938) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Deprodded without improvement. The one current source which can be searched produced zero in-depth coverage of this subject. Searches also turned up zero in-depth sourcing about this. As it stands, there isn't enough sourcing to pass WP:VERIFY. Onel5969 TT me 01:35, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naseem Rana

[edit]
Naseem Rana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:TNT. There is absolutely nothing verifiable in this article and the one cited source goes to a compromised domain with no content. Searching on Google turns up shockingly little information: as far as I can tell he is mentioned in exactly two contexts: in a list of previous Directors General of ISI in recent news articles announcing the appointment of more recent holders of that position, and in writings about the Taliban that occasionally tangentially mention Naseem Rana as having been present during one or two events that took place during his tenure as DGISI. The alternative to deletion is reduction of the article to the following:

Naseem Rana is a Pakistani general who served as the director-general of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) from 1995 to October 1998.[1] He was reportedly present at a meeting between Prince Turki al-Faisal and Mullah Omar in 1998.[2]

Not even his birthdate or the Urdu spelling of his name seem to be verifiable (searching Google for نسيم رانا produces zero relevant hits), or for that matter whether he is still alive. I would say people need to find and add more sources (since surely they exist - this guy was supposedly an important military official involved in historic and much-studied events) but even if sources can be found, the current article is still WP:TNT bad so it's better to wipe it and leave open the possibility of starting fresh when/if more sources can be found. -- LWG talk 04:44, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Khillia and White fortresses

[edit]
Siege of Khillia and White fortresses (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It's hard to see a notable topic here for this 1420 siege. It's sourced to two YouTube videos and a coin-selling site, none of which mention, as far as I can find, a siege or any fortresses. And it is completely the work of an editor who has done nothing else, so may not even be serious. Dicklyon (talk) 04:51, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Source notes: This 1420 siege might may be related to Siege of Chilia (1484), a fortress with some similar variant spellings, but in a different year? Possibly also related to the "White Citadel" (Cetatea Alba) besieged in 1484 according to reddit, which says "However, Moldovans lost Cetatea Alba in 1484, after an Ottoman siege. The loss of this fortress (along with the fortified city of Chilia) forced the country to start repaying tribute to the Ottoman Empire." Was the 1420 siege a predecessor to the 1484 siege, or is this article just made up and unsourceable? I don't know. I actually hope someone can figure it out and rescue it. Dicklyon (talk) 05:17, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Found some – using the spelling Chilia I was able to find some scholar articles that seem to mention a 1420 repulsion of the Ottomans, so I admit now it's real and probably notable, just needs a lot of work. E.g. this book with Cetatea Alba, but no Chilia in 1420. Dicklyon (talk) 05:32, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Capture of Kostiantynivka

[edit]
Capture of Kostiantynivka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

That's yet another small engagement in the Russian invasion of Ukraine given a page for no reason. References 2, 4, 9, 11, 13 (that's just 2 but repeated), 14, 15 and 17 do not even mention this village. Half of the ones that do are from the Institute for the Study of War, which gives daily updates about all engagements regardless of notability. Actually most of this article does not even deal with the village but with the surrounding settlements. This is an useless content fork of 2025 Sumy Oblast incursion, with much duplicated information. Kostiantynivka is a small village of 243 people (in 2001) which most likely no particular military or strategic value. The Sumy incursion article only has 1,963 words [3], far from the recommended 6,000-word threshold after which a split is plausible [4]. And this article was written by ChatGPT as you can see by checking the url of references 6 and 15. The little care that the supposed author of this article has given it is evident considering this source [5] is cited when it doesn't even talk about this village but about a town also named Kostiantynivka in a different province and front and with 66,000 inhabitants. Super Ψ Dro 09:35, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Albania–Yugoslav aircraft incident (1967)

[edit]
Albania–Yugoslav aircraft incident (1967) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Where there are any working sources they're to blogs or forums. no indication that this passes WP:GNG. Very minor Cold War incident. Molikog (talk) 05:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror Brigade

[edit]
Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror Brigade (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

On 14MAY2025, I PRODed this article with the following rationale: "Plainly fails WP:SIGCOV, as the MEMRI coverage only refers to it as one among many Syrian Turkmen Brigades, The New York Times only devotes a single sentence to remarking on the trend of naming after Ottoman rulers, and Bulbajer's guide on Google Docs is not a reliable source. The Institute for the Study of War is a generally reputable source, but its brief coverage is only cited to X/Twitter posts. Searches for additional sources did not yield significant coverage to merit an article separate from Syrian Turkmen Brigades and Sultan Murad Division." A. B. chose to redirect to Sultan Murad Division as a reasonable alternative to deletion and Durranistan changed the redirect to Syrian Turkmen Brigades, as this brigade is part of that grouping but left the Sultan Murad Division nine years ago. Today, article creator Farcazo reverted the change to a redirect, simply remarking "It's the thought of one user, not all of Wikipedia." in the edit summary. I support the latter redirect target, so per WP:ATD-R, I am proposing that here. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 02:41, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Morina

[edit]
Battle of Morina (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I reckon this fails WP:GNG. According to Vickers & Pettifer, there were "25 minor battles in the Koshare/Morina corridor, between 1 January and 31 August 1998, more than in the rest of the Albania/Kosova border areas put together". [6] This clash appears to be one of them. Boolean searches using numerous different permutations ("KLA" AND "Morina" AND "1998", etc.) turn up nothing pertaining to it other than this very article and Wiki mirrors. A Google search for the Albanian term "Beteja e Morinës" between 1999 and 2022 returns 9 results, mostly Youtube videos and Facebook posts. [7] It is only in July 2023 that we see a couple of articles in mainstream Albanian-language sources from Kosovo marking the 25th anniversary of what was supposedly a great KLA victory. [8]

This sparsity shouldn’t be all too surprising considering the fatalities on the Yugoslav army side, and by extension the significance of the event, are made entirely from whole cloth. According to the Kosovo Memory Book, which contains a detailed list of all 13,000+ conflict-related fatalities from 1 January 1998 to December 31, 2000, 6 ethnic Albanian combatants and 1 civilian were killed in the municipality of Đakovica/Gjakovë on 7 July 1998, which aligns with the article’s claim of 6 KLA killed. However, no other military or civilian deaths are recorded in the municipality on this date, let alone 64. [9] Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Kleçka

[edit]
Battle of Kleçka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doubtful whether this meets WP:GNG. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deblocking of Dulje, of which this is somewhat of a WP:CFORK. The whole article can be summarized in the background of Klečka killings, which were uncovered as a result of this operation. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:51, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Dulu

[edit]
Battle of Dulu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

subject previously declined at AfC due to lack of reliable sources and notability concerns I know it's a different user who created it this,but they cited the same unacceptable sources, And it appears to have same sourcing deficiencies, with only one reliable academic source (Beckwith) among five citations. Remaining sources include file-sharing sites (dokumen.pub), primary source translations, and unverifiable PDF links that don't meet Wikipedia's reliability standards. Battle does not appear to meet WP:NHIST requirements for historical events and doesn't meet WP:GNG. R3YBOl (🌲) 12:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Qabusiye massacre

[edit]
Qabusiye massacre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Average kurd and DataNomad, again and it fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NOTNEWS. I couldn't find any sources on this other than the ones currently in use 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 12:27, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seventy-second firman of the Yazidi

[edit]
Seventy-second firman of the Yazidi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I accepted this at WP:AFC in good faith, but having seen comments on the talk page it seems that the article is contentious, and possibly misleading so bringing it here for a community discussion. Theroadislong (talk) 17:52, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stubify or redirect to persecution of Yazidis. It is likely possible to write some sort of article on this topic, but this one would to be scrapped and rewritten to satisfy WP:VER. I don't object to deletion. On second thought just delete the article; content has enough issues that preserving is more harmful than helpful and I've begun to doubt the notability since all the sources I've found are either passing mentions or derivative of the Six-Hohenbalken paper. It's a shame this topic is not better documented or researched, but we can't change that. (t · c) buidhe 18:01, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't remember well but This article was first named as "Yazidi genocide" and as I do remember it was drafted because of multiple problems, I can see that they changed everything in the draft and then moved to article (Or maybe requested for moving it to articles), and I am right about this, you can check the history editing of the article for my claims about it's old title and topic. Since the creator has been involved in Creating hoax content, I support the deletion of the article, and maybe another good faith editor can re-create it with a better version. R3YBOl (🌲) 18:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Skitash (talk) 18:41, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draftspace. The article is clearly not ready, which I thought it was, which was why I submitted the draft for review. I am still trying to make sure the article can work and be on Wikipedia. If you have any problems with the article, please contact me. I will try to fix every part of the article, as I don't believe this article is a hoax either. Thank You.Spino-Soar-Us (talk) 11:36, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assyrian-Kurdish Clashes (1840-1895)

[edit]
Assyrian-Kurdish Clashes (1840-1895) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article lacks sufficient reliable sources and appears to reflect a non-neutral, possibly partisan narrative. It fails to meet Wikipedia’s standards for notability, sourcing, and neutrality. Much of the content is unsourced or poorly cited, and it presents a historical conflict in a way that seems one-sided, potentially violating Wikipedia's policies on neutrality (WP:NPOV) and verifiability (WP:V). A search for academic or high-quality sources on this specific topic yields very little coverage, suggesting it may not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for historical events (WP:NOTE). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madeaccountfr (talk • contribs) 08:42, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Check the page now Suraya222 (talk) 11:43, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - There are some pretty poorly written sections, both from a sourcing standpoint and actual written English (the ones with seemingly random capitalized words are especially jarring to look at), but the article is salveagable and I think there's at least a good chance a good article can be written on the subject. In any case I'm not going to give the benefit of the doubt to the banned (not just blocked!) nominator who is a notoriously bad faith participant. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 15:10, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Iraq, and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:55, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.  Zemen  (talk) 16:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.
Jackhanma69 (talk) 10:40, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'''Keep''' - I don't see the reason for Deletion, And I provided the sources and Made the Page better Suraya222 (talk) 22:16, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'''Keep''' – if there's another problem, please tell me so I can change it. Suraya222 (talk) 22:20, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'''Keep''' Suraya222 (talk) 16:13, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can Anyone Please Tell me how the hell do I type Keep but Bold and Black Suraya222 (talk) 16:18, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The information is backed by the sources. Assyrians and Kurds had many clashes in Hakkari in the 1800s that are well documented. Termen28 (talk) 03:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. StrongCap (talk) 11:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC) Blocked as a sock. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:30, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@StrongCap Explain why you want the page to be deleted Suraya222 (talk) 12:51, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Suraya222 (talk) 12:50, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note here that both the nominator Madeaccountfr and voter StrongCap have been blocked as sockpuppets of notorious WP:LTA editor Tishreen07 [10]. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allegations of ethnic cleansing by Kurdish forces in northern Syria (2015–2016)

[edit]
Allegations of ethnic cleansing by Kurdish forces in northern Syria (2015–2016) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reads like AI and is created by a user who recently got indeffed for creating hoaxes. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Average kurd and DataNomad, again 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:01, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FR Yugoslav Strike Mission

[edit]
FR Yugoslav Strike Mission (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This was redirected to Kosovo War 12 years ago before being recreated by an IP a few months back. [11] [12] Not only does it not meet WP:GNG, as others have noted, but under the current name and within the current framing it is essentially a WP:HOAX and it makes no sense to redirect it to Kosovo War again. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 21:43, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. — Sadko (words are wind) 20:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

020413 DOJ White Paper

[edit]
020413 DOJ White Paper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

copied to wikisource - s:Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U. S. Citizen Who Is a Senior Operational Leader of Al-Qa'ida or An Associated Force, no reason to keep —Matrix(!) ping onewhen replying {u - t? - uselessc} 18:31, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Attacks on Ponoševac

[edit]
Attacks on Ponoševac (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While it is mentioned in contemporary sources, a clash in which 1 combatant was killed on one side and 3 on the other over the course of 3 days certainly falls under WP:NOTNEWS, WP:EFFECT and WP:DEPTH and is of questionable notability. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:51, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Sedrenik '94

[edit]
Operation Sedrenik '94 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Other than a passing mention by the CIA and at an ICTY trial, this operation isn't explored in any great depth in reliable sources. The article itself makes no mention of casualties, nor is the significance of this offensive readily apparent. Fails WP:GNG. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:45, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only reference for this is Balkan Battlegrounds (I'm unaware of the primary sources you refer to). It is mentioned in both volumes, Vol 1. p. 237 and Vol 2. p. 456, which are almost identical in wording, and are cited to essentially the same sources. The current Incident section is basically a direct cut and paste of the relevant paras, which in both volumes are headed "September: The ARBiH at Sarajevo/Sedrenik". At no point in the main text of the refs or the relevant footnotes is this "very small attack" referred to as an "operation", let alone "Operation Sedrenik '94". So it isn't a plausible search term, because no such named "operation" exists in the refs. This is a name for an isolated and inconclusive piece of fighting over two days that has been editor-generated. Let's not perpetuate it, even if in a redirect. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Expulsion of Soviets from Albania

[edit]
Expulsion of Soviets from Albania (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An obvious WP:CFORK of Albanian–Soviet split combined with parts of Vlora incident, which was created by the same sockpuppet account and which itself is a CFORKy take on Albanian–Soviet split. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:37, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brest attack

[edit]
Brest attack (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An ambush with 2 overall deaths doesn't meet WP:N criteria and falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:31, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Spiderone: It's safe to assume anyone typing in Brest attack will be looking for the disambiguation page Battle of Brest, not this incident. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 13:39, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Wynwick55gl: An event simply being mentioned in WP:RS is not the foremost criterion when deciding whether to keep or delete an article, see WP:EVENTCRITERIA. This is especially true of an event that is just another Tuesday in Chicago in terms of fatalities. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 13:39, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is laughable. Are you seriously comparing murders committed in a city like Chicago, which has more inhabitants than all of North Macedonia combined, with this insurgency? I don’t see rebels taking over parts of Chicago and ambushing some of its highest ranking politicians. And besides, a military engagement doesn’t need 500 casualties to deserve its own article, otherwise you could start AfD's for 90% of the wikipedia articles related to combat history. GermanManFromFrankfurt (talk) 18:50, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, what's laughable is your belief that Wikipedia is an indiscriminate repository of information, when we have entire policy guidelines and essays explaining why it very clearly isn't. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The battle does hold significance, it was the very engagement that allowed the NLA to expand its activities into the Kumanovo region, as mentioned in the sources. These events were also widely reported in Western media, such as the LA Times, CNN, and the BBC. Furthermore, it marked another escalation of the conflict, as the NLA targeted Macedonian politicians, including Deputy Interior Minister Refet Elmazi and State Secretary of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Ljube Boškoski. GermanManFromFrankfurt (talk) 14:36, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep

While the Brest ambush in 2001 may appear to involve a relatively small number of casualties, we must not forget that brest was a significant route for the NLA to reach the Karadak zone. This conflict was an insurgency, and it didn't require heavy losses to have an article. Otherwise dozens articles would have to be deleted as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daddyson11111 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's correct, dozens of articles need to be deleted. Also, see WP:WHATABOUTX for arguments to avoid in a discussion. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Glanasela

[edit]
Battle of Glanasela (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:CFORK of Central Drenica offensive. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:05, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nom. Vast majority of the article is cited to an unreliable blog. --Griboski (talk) 18:01, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it has sources from multiple sides and they are very reliable, your personal opinion does not effect facts. 79.140.150.3 (talk) 19:48, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't a matter of opinion. WP has guidelines on what constitutes a RS. "srpskioklop.paluba.info", a forum and blog, would not be one of them. --Griboski (talk) 18:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — Sadko (words are wind) 20:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Đocaj and Jasić

[edit]
Battle of Đocaj and Jasić (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:CFORK of Battle of Junik. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:40, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, There is no reason why this battle shouldn't stay as an article. The battle should stay as its own article because it was the very battle in which Goran Ostojic, a major commander of the Yugoslav Army and the chief of staff of the 63rd Parachute Brigade, was killed in action along with two other VJ commanders. For this reason alone, the battle deserves to remain its own article. However, I also noticed some people trying to add Goran Ostojic to the Battle of Junik as the battle in which he died, but the battle in question was not actually part of the Battle of Junik. GermanManFromFrankfurt (talk) 01:49, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vërrini Conflict

[edit]
Vërrini Conflict (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:CFORK of KLA Summer offensive (1998). Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:38, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article is a total mess and full of original research as well. --Griboski (talk) 17:36, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — Sadko (words are wind) 20:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Llapusha-South Drenica Front

[edit]
Llapusha-South Drenica Front (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:CFORK of KLA Summer offensive (1998). Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:37, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Šušaja

[edit]
Battle of Šušaja (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Small skirmishes like this one, from an insurgency in which a total of several dozen people were killed over the course of two years, clearly falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It seems like Amanuensis Balkanicus is on a bit of a rant, trying to delete anything that even mentions an Albanian insurgent victory. A battle that lasted four days, involved multiple APCs, seven tanks (one of which was damaged), as well as special forces, and left around 9 to 12 participants dead or wounded—including one member of the SAJ special forces—is clearly not a small skirmish. If we're going by that logic, why not start an AfD for the Battle of Oraovica too? GermanManFromFrankfurt (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this was a rather big escelation in insurgency, hence meets the criteria of WP:N and should stay. Durraz0 (talk) 21:01, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Dobrosin

[edit]
Battle of Dobrosin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Small skirmishes like this one, from an insurgency in which a total of several dozen people were killed over the course of two years, clearly falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Again, just like in the case of the Battle of Đocaj and Jasić, this battle holds significance. It was the very battle that marked the outbreak of the Insurgency in the Preševo Valley. This was the first major engagement between the LAPMB and Yugoslav forces. I see no reason why it should be deleted. Furthermore, it was widely reported on in Western media, as shown by the sources mentioned in the article. GermanManFromFrankfurt (talk) 01:56, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Cerevajka

[edit]
Battle of Cerevajka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Small skirmishes like this one, from an insurgency in which a total of several dozen people were killed over the course of two years, clearly falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nom. --Griboski (talk) 17:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — Sadko (words are wind) 20:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Bukoc

[edit]
Battle of Bukoc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Small skirmishes like this one, from an insurgency in which a total of several dozen people were killed over the course of two years, clearly falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:20, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Skirmish on Saint Ilija Mountain

[edit]
Skirmish on Saint Ilija Mountain (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Small skirmishes like this one, from an insurgency in which a total of several dozen people were killed over the course of two years, clearly falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a random skirmish as you may think, its very imporant to not have its page, it was a big strategical operation which affected result of the Insurgency by a lot. 79.140.150.3 (talk) 19:46, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lake Radonjić operation

[edit]
Lake Radonjić operation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Clearly a WP:CFORK of Lake Radonjić massacre. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:14, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Close Combat Badge

[edit]
Close Combat Badge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nomination: Originally considered merging this page into Combat Action Badge (CAB). However, the "History" section of the CAB article already covers the CCB and has... well, not great references but more than this. I do plan on expanding discussion of the CCB in the CAB article (assuming I can find the sources) but there is no reason for this article to exist. It has sat unsourced for 20 years. MWFwiki (talk) 22:31, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect. The risk of confusion with Close Combat Clasp is certainly possible, so should be considered, but as noted there are very few views in any case. DeemDeem52 (talk) 15:23, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly fire during the Gaza war

[edit]
Friendly fire during the Gaza war (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

More Gaza war cruft. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTADIRECTORY. Any shred of encyclopedic value, perhaps one or two lines on the total number of friendly fired incidents, can be included in Israeli_invasion_of_the_Gaza_Strip#Military_casualties, where the topic is already covered. Longhornsg (talk) 21:01, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retain (for now). The article is a good summary of information which is not found elsewhere on Wikipedia. A discussion should be held on the article's talk page to discuss whether the article should be renamed, merged, re-written or otherwise. 20WattSphere (talk) 01:40, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Jabaliya Dam

[edit]
Battle of Jabaliya Dam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS. Every development doesn't need its own article. "Battle of Jabaliya Dam" is pure WP:SYNTH anyway. Material already covered and included at Israeli invasion of Syria (2024–present). Longhornsg (talk) 16:50, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete For the following reasons:
1. It's necessarily a battle; it was just people from Nawa shouting for Jihad
2. There's no explanation of what happened to the Israeli troops. The article mentions in the infobox that they withdrew, but has no sources.
3. Few sources Farcazo (talk) 22:21, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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. ✗plicit 14:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khmeimim Air Base clashes

[edit]
Khmeimim Air Base clashes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS, unclear if such an attack took place, the sources used are not credible, and the article may constitute a hoax. Ecrusized (talk) 11:43, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support since this is just a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of the Khmeimim Air Base article's Major Incidents section. Asclepias tuberosa (talk) 11:47, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete has no credible sources and contains the following errors:
- Brigades Jaafar al-Tayytar does not belong to Burkan al-Furat
- It has no historical background
- It was a small attack, not enough to warrant an article I tried to make an article .... but I left it because of how simple it is Farcazo (talk) 20:09, 6 June 2025 (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.

Helge Mathisen

[edit]
Helge Mathisen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Mostly based on a personal website and a database, lacks reliable indepth sources to establish notability. Fram (talk) 16:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you elaborate as to what parts need more referances? I have found more sources for his service, but naturally his early and late life is not much covered by other sources than helgemathisen.com LillaRis87 (talk) 06:39, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:GNG/WP:NBIO. We need independent, non-database reliable sources which give significant coverage to him. Some newspaper articles about him, a chapter or some pages in a book, ... It doesn't need to cover his whole life, though it should be about more than one event normally (see WP:BIO1E, but that doesn't seem to be the issue here). Fram (talk) 08:01, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you. I will look, and I'll understand the deletion if I fail in finding anything. LillaRis87 (talk) 14:02, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Will the sources the site helgemathisen.com use be valid? They are from an independent newspaper. I apologise if I'm posting too often on this discussion, but I want to do this properly. (As I've never been through this proccess before.) LillaRis87 (talk) 14:07, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have some examples? Fram (talk) 14:13, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.helgemathisen.com/kilder is the page where helgemathisen.com lists it's sources. They are independent newspapers like "Tromsø Avis", a newspaper based in Tromsø and a few other sources. LillaRis87 (talk) 14:14, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that helps. First one seems to be about him, so looks like a good source to establish notability. As far as I understand them (but feel free to correct me), second and third are more about the regiment in general, with some attention to him but a lot about others? The fourth one doesn't count for notability, it's the family posting an obituary (again, if I see it correctly).
Perhaps merging this article to No. 331 Squadron RNoAF or starting an article specifically on the squadron during WWII, with some info on Mathisen included, may be a good solution? In any case thank you for helping to think about this and to get all available info in here. Fram (talk) 14:37, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The first is about Helge, the second is about the boat Helge took to England, the third is pretty 50/50 about him and the 331 Squadron, and the fourth is an obituary by his family, yes. I'm not sure if I should maybe remove the parts with limited sources/evidence, and add the new sources, or if I should merge it. I'm new to wikipedia, and I'd like you to make the choice. LillaRis87 (talk) 16:04, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also wondering if I have to delete the sources listed under the sites not good enough, if so, I'll be happy to do so. LillaRis87 (talk) 14:29, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have consolidated the references somewhat, and added author names to some. It seems that so far, we have two independent sources - the Nordlands Fremtid article from 1965, and the Tromsø Avis article from 2005. Both are in the article as scans of the original articles. I think they're independent, secondary sources, although I don't know Norwegian, so I'm not sure - the 1965 article may be Mathisen's story in his own words, so not independent or secondary. The warhistoryonline source is based on family information, so isn't independent either. Unless there are more independent, secondary sources, it's not looking like there's enough for a stand-alone article. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:45, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The articles listed in the sources page for helgemathisen.com are all fully independent except for the last one, which is not independent whatsoever. (Of the four articles, all the other sources are lost.) LillaRis87 (talk) 20:33, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Could I not remove the parts only covered by personal sources and keep what's also covered by independent ones? LillaRis87 (talk) 16:00, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete reluctantly, as it's really hard to tell whether he is notable, but based on the sources which are available I don't think we're quite there yet. The articles are all from his hometown. There may be good coverage in the books, but the website also tells exactly where he's mentioned and without access I'm not sure we can assume? The other thing though is this is nowhere near a firm delete - we could easily keep this on the assumption the book sources are good enough to pass GNG, especially the second book on that website where he has 13 pages of coverage, so the closer should treat this !vote lightly if others advocate for it to be kept or if new sources are found. This is actually an odd instance where the fact he has a web site dedicated to him hurts as that's all that comes up in my search results and the sources there don't clearly clear the GNG bar... SportingFlyer T·C 03:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    So what should I do? LillaRis87 (talk) 16:36, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:05, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Princewill Chimezie Richards

[edit]
Princewill Chimezie Richards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails notability guidelines, as notability is not inherited from the Biafra Nations League. Searches fail to indicate notability of the individual aside from serving as a spokesman for the group. In lieu of deletion, the redirect could be restored or relevant content can be merged to the aforementioned article. Jellyfish (mobile) (talk) 14:19, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone sees this, would they be able to move the comment on the talk page (which I'm assuming is a keep vote) here? I'm unable to easily on my phone. Thanks! Jellyfish (mobile) (talk) 13:51, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing.
Logs: 2025-06 ✍️ create
--Cewbot (talk) 00:08, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of military attachés and war correspondents in World War I

[edit]
List of military attachés and war correspondents in World War I (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

What possible reason is there to join two distinct groups in a "list" that is not a list, when the two groups have their own separate lists? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:29, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Puzzling: I see now in the talk page that the decision was made in 2022 to split the list in two. However, is still retaining an article (of sorts) the only way to keep the edit history? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:34, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:20, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article cannot be deleted, since the historical attribution before the split must be preserved. But the article is not needed now that both lists are split. So I guess options are either pick a redirect target somehow, or turn this into a brief disambigation page. MarioGom (talk) 15:18, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Get rid of this page but in a way that enables us to preserve the attribution history. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Democrat Castle

[edit]
Democrat Castle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

None of the sources listed mention the castle. Does not meet notability. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 18:01, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 19:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of World War II war correspondents (1942–43)

[edit]
List of World War II war correspondents (1942–43) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Arbitrary criterion (" war correspondents who reported from North Africa or Italy in 1942-43") fails WP:NLIST. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:27, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oppose deletion, does not fail WP:NLIST because of established notability Vofa (talk) 12:07, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 16:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aulikara−Hunnic War

[edit]
Aulikara−Hunnic War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject matter doesn't meet notability according to WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT. It has not received enough coverage in reliable secondary sources; primarily, the content is original and speculative. There is also significant overlap with existing articles on Aulikaras and the Alchon Huns, making the entry a copy. The Red Archive (talk) 18:40, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:12, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:03, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Mayuran (Saba)

[edit]
Captain Mayuran (Saba) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A bodyguard that lacks notability per Wikipedia:Notability (people). ÆthelflædofMercia (talk) 02:12, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NONENG Recommend that sources be in English but as long as non-English sources are reliable and could be verified they are also allowed. -UtoD 10:41, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the sources doesn't seem to meet WP:RS. ÆthelflædofMercia (talk) 16:52, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your concern regarding the sources. I’m currently working on finding additional references in English or from more widely accepted Tamil publications. I would appreciate any suggestions on how to improve the article’s compliance with WP:RS. Thili1977 (talk) 18:37, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 02:58, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for continuing the discussion. While there are no English-language articles about Captain Mayuran (Saba), this is primarily because he served in a security role within the LTTE, which was not internationally covered in detail. However, his internal importance to the organization was clearly recognized — for example, the LTTE named a sniper unit after him after his death. His legacy is remembered through Tamil-language commemorative publications, obituaries, and community memorials. I understand the need for reliable sourcing and am doing my best to represent the subject neutrally and verifiably, within the limits of what is available. Thili1977 (talk) 19:45, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:54, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the suggestion to move this to the Tamil Wikipedia, but I believe this topic has relevance for an English-speaking audience as well — especially in the context of the Sri Lankan civil war and the Tamil diaspora. Many members of the younger diaspora today can no longer read Tamil fluently, or at all. Having this article in English supports broader educational access, cross-cultural understanding, and historical documentation. I hope the article can be retained and improved here rather than removed or relocated. Thili1977 (talk) 17:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am the original contributor of this article. Captain Mayuran (Saba) was a member of the LTTE during the Sri Lankan civil war and served as a close protection officer for LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran. He participated in several key operations and is remembered within the Tamil community, especially for his role during the Battle of Pooneryn in 1993, where he was killed in action. The article is based on multiple Tamil sources, including contemporary reports and commemorative publications. I have aimed to present the content in a neutral, fact-based manner. I’m open to improvements and willing to add stronger references if needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thili1977 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Military Proposed deletions

[edit]

The following articles have been tagged for proposed deletion:


Current PRODs

[edit]
[edit]

The following military-related IfD's are currently open for discussion:

  • None at present
[edit]

The following military-related MfD's are currently open for discussion:

[edit]

The following military-related TfD's are currently open for discussion:

None at present
[edit]

The following military-related CfD's are currently open for discussion:

[edit]

The following military-related RfD's are currently open for discussion:

[edit]
  • None at present
[edit]

The following military-related Speedy Deletions are currently open:

None at present

[edit]

The following military-related Deletion reviews are currently open for discussion:

None at present

[edit]

None at present

[edit]

None at present

[edit]

None at present

  1. ^ Shah, Sabir. "ISI gets its 25th chief: The saga of premier intelligence agency". The News.
  2. ^ Khan, Adnan. "What Pakistan would have gained by protecting bin Laden". Maclean's.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Military&oldid=1295418761"