Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of military commanders

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 no consensus. W.marsh 20:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of military commanders

Impossible to maintain. There are several thousand military commanders in world military history. A category would be sufficient and conflict infoboxes would be sufficient. --Ineffable3000

• Strong Delete as nom. --Ineffable3000 04:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Best as a category. MER-C 07:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, doesn't provide any advantage over the categories for this. Kirill Lokshin 09:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, redundant, categories are the best for such stuff. Terence Ong 12:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Redundant. TSO1D 14:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I don't see a single category that covers this topic. I find the list useful. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 19:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. A list which is, of necessity, grossly incomplete is not valuable.--Anthony.bradbury 00:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Very useful list, organized so as to help find one from a particluar era. The incompleteness complaint is answered by listing all those with Wikipedia articles. If one is redlinked and deserves an article, add it. This is an inportan aspect of world hisotyr, as opposed to cruft, dicdefs, and lists of or articles about randome collections of things. Edison 00:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Useful; poor reasoning behind article nomination. --Hemlock Martinis 05:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Addendum. Allow me to expand my case. The crux of the argument for deletion is based on the theory that people would try to clog the list full of every military commander known to man. This argument, however, overlooks the notability requirements on Wikipedia. Instead, the argument assumes the worst without considering concurrent policies that would prevent such an overpopulation. --Hemlock Martinis 01:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep The structure of this list and the annotations are very useful. I would suggest sorting within the locations chronologically, but otherwise it's fine as is. A category can't replace this, and can't be chronologically sorted, which is very useful for historical analysis. There's no reason it can't be maintained as needed, and I believe I am the first one to even suggest any maintenance it might need. I can do my suggestion quite easily if this article is going to be kept. Furthermore, as Richard Arthur Norton pointed out, there is presently no category for military commanders. Not being able to fill the list with every military commander ever is not a problem. It doesn't need to be complete, just as complete as wiki contributors can make it. I can see no reason to delete it, and it's a very useful article, so I must recommend strongly that we keep it. -NorsemanII 06:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I found this page useful too. As a category, military commanders, would be huge with no indication of who is more important than who. It would be a pain to dig through. A category for famous military commanders couldn't tell you what they were famous for. The biggest benefit to keeping this page is that you can subdivide it into even smaller partitions like famous ancient roman generals for instance and have a short description by the names. I was looking for an ancient Greek general that did a particular deed without knowing his name or date and I was able to use the (rather short) description to find him. It would have been a lot harder trying him down through another method. If anything this article needs a little expansion and concatination with some other famous military commander articles. Sifaka ^talk 07:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC) Additional point to make, there is nothing suitable to replace it as of now. A category should be made before it goes in the rubbish bin rather than lose someone's hard work. Sifaka ^talk 07:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion rather than get rid of the whole thing, it could be changed to famous military commanders or you could could split it into separate small articles like famous ancient military commanders. Sifaka ^talk 07:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Clearly category material. Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - This page is an eternal POV. There were many generals who will never be included on it. Long lists are hard to maintain as well. --Ineffable3000 22:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• delete non-maintainable. almost every military person in wikipedia is/was a military commander. Mukadderat 01:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Very strong keep - easily maintainable. History, already having gone by, is relatively static, so once an entry has been made, what's to maintain? This is a very useful structured list. Like most other lists and articles on Wikipedia, it is a work in progress and will improve over time (it is already of high quality), as more history buffs add to it.  The Transhumanist   12:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep — per The Transhumanist. Dionyseus 02:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Easily maintainable. --- RockMFR 04:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep As with previous lists, those who find them useful should have them. Anything actually used by this many interest WP people should be kept/ I do not set up to judge whether othe people "should" use articles, only that they do.DGG 07:51, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

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.