Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Law enforcement in Afghanistan

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 keep as a stub and as part of the Category:Law enforcement by country series. — CharlotteWebb 07:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Law enforcement in Afghanistan

Surely this information could simply be merged into Afghanistan. I don't believe that there is enough depth of information here to justify an independent article. Indeed, a lot of it is made up of things that might happen or are scheduled to happen. Until enough info is amassed to surpass something as simple as a brief mention in the parent article, I don't see a need for this. Soltak | Talk 23:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Merge and redirect as per nominator. Why did you bring this to AfD? Surely you could have just done it, or perhaps placed a merge proposal on the article for a couple of days? J Milburn 23:15, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
That's a good point. Honestly I didn't even think of it. Isn't it sad that AfD is the first thing that popped into my mind? I'll take care of it now. Soltak | Talk 23:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I made the changes but still recommend deletion as I do not feel a redirect would be worthwhile. Someone looking for information on Afghan law enforcement is much more likely to first check the main article than to type in Law enforcement in Afghanistan. Soltak | Talk 23:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I recognize the need for articles such as Law enforcement in Germany because it contains a large amount of information and has a breadth and depth suitable of an independent article. Law enforcement in Afghanistan provides nothing that can't simply be included in Afghanistan. Soltak | Talk 19:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Then you are proposing a merge and redirect and wasting everyone's time in AFD. There is a reason for stub articles, and when they are part of a common grouping with similar scope and titles, there is more reason to keep them around as an incentive for someone to expand the topic. --Dhartung | Talk 22:09, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • keep as a stub There is indeed a reason,: that not much is written here yet does not mean that it cannot be. Deleting (or for that matter) merging stubs defeats the customary way of building article.s Most good WP articles began as stubs. DGG 05:10, 1 February 2007 (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.