Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anglo-saxon warfare

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-29 06:05Z

[edit] Anglo-saxon warfare

Anglo-saxon warfare (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Content is entirely the result of original research. ju66l3r 05:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Bigtop 05:35, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • England needs another article? Puh-leeeeze! Delete this essay and Speedy redirect to History of Anglo-Saxon England. No references, nothing to merge. Tubezone 06:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and add references, which are abundant and easy to find for this subject (e.g., G.P. Baker, The Fighting Kings of Wessex). This is an important historical topic. The complaint that this is another article about England is frivolous and bizarre. Needing to have references added where references obviously exist is not the same as original research. --OinkOink 07:03, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Of course this needs to be kept, and expanded upon, according to the spirit of Wikipedia's open source method. It is a very important topic for understanding English pre-conquest history. Kozushi 07:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
As you are the the author, I would suggest you wikify this article, add references and link it to articles where the subject is pertinent, such as History of Anglo-Saxon England. If it fits in to the overall scheme and is useful, then I could change my position, and others might too. As it stands it's just an orphan essay. England has lots and lots of articles, I'm probably more aggrieved about various English hoax (my, English schoolkids just love a good practical joke), nn football club and petrol station articles that have to be constantly deleted than this one, which on a second glance at least could serve a useful purpose rather than being yet more Anglocruft. Tubezone 11:03, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Although this period of warfare probably merits a military history article, there wasn't much that was unique to the Anglo-Saxons. It's essayish, and the bits derived from contemporary poetry/historical epics are original research. Some of the rest could be properly sourced, but again, the scope is probably wrong. --Dhartung | Talk 07:19, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete given that anglo-saxon... is a historical contrivance to describe a somewhat diverse group of people with different habits and practices... this article is either OR or non-encyclopedic. --Buridan 13:33, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep noting that some of the above appear to be statements of odd POV. This topic is particularly important for the period up to and including Hastings, and the difference in approaches at that crucial battle was very important. England is hardly the front-runner in terms of irrelevant cruft, and this topic is far from irrelevant. A primary source is not original research, there probably should be more requirement for them.FasterPussycatWooHoo 14:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, but expand, and add some citations and references. This is a rather relevant important topic in English military history. I would suggest AFDing articles such as non notable English diners, pubs, and amateur football clubs too, if there's a constant complaint abt too much England related articles. =) -Advanced 18:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - --Bryson 19:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete This is unsourced. It could well deserve an article, when that section elsewhere becomes too large. However, on the other hand, I can find no information on the matter elsewhere in Wikipedia. Although this particular article should be deleted unless sources can be provided, I am going to try and find an appropriate WikiProject and contact them on the matter. J Milburn 20:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. The subject matter is worthy. This text will not be useless to someone who wishes to improve it. Disputes about the content of the article are not matters for AfD. - Smerdis of Tlön 21:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
The problem here isn't content, it's what's lacking, like sources, links and organisation. There's at least 20 articles on Anglo-Saxon England, another 30 in Category:Battles of the Anglo-Saxons, this article should fit in with those articles and be linked to and from them in some logical manner. Tubezone 00:05, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, its definitely OR but make sure to let the creator know its being deleted - he/she may wish to keep such work. Thedreamdied 22:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and cleanup bigtime.--Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 23:03, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep The topic seems notable and if not now well referenced there are many credible sources. I don't think that poor style is grounds for deletion, rather it should be cleaned up.
  • Keep. It needs to be cleaned up. Badly. But it's a legit subject that deserves an article. jgp TC 17:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep thought it needs a lot of work. CRGreathouse (t | c) 09:19, 28 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.