Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Special Operations Group (United States)

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 of the debate was no consensus to delete. W.marsh 17:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Special Operations Group (United States)

This information is covered in about 9 or 10 other articles on Special Forces in the United States, any information here that is not covered in those should be merged Batman2005 02:23, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, though this is Articles for deletion, not Articles for merging. Royal Blue 02:46, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I know its articles for deletion. Which is why i listed it and said that after pulling any relevant information...the article should be deleted. Batman2005 02:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

• Transwiki to Wiktionary Or possibly keep as a kind of disambiguation page. Crypticfirefly 03:31, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

If there are "9 or 10 other articles on Special Forces in the United States," then a disambiguation page makes sense, then. I'd suggest a Merge and Redirect. JKBrooks85 15:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete this article is covered in depth in the SOCOM article. SOG is the same, so either delete or redirect to SOCOM. 4.224.99.88 03:50, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Anonymous users cannot vote here. Sorry. --Nkcs 02:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes they can. JIP | Talk 14:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom.,,,,,Ariele 04:10, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Avi 00:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect, no point in making it hard for people to find our articles on Special forces Night Gyr 04:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm confused. I put a prod tag on an article after I merged it with a better one. (The reason I did a prod instead of a redirect is that the title was non-standard and possibly ambiguous, and nothing linked to it. However, someone came along and changed it to a redirect saying the WP:GFDL required keeping the original after a merge. So what's story with this AfD regarding merge or delete and redirect? Was my editor wrong or am I missing something? Thatcher131 05:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

If we Merge we need to record the original authors so they can get credit, as required by the GFDL. This could probably actually be accomplished by copying the page history to the talk page of the new article, but keeping the old one as a redirect is the most thorough way. Night Gyr 05:31, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I think you guys are missing the point. "Special Operations Group" is a laymans term for "SOCOM." There's nothing to merge as all the information contained in this article is already covered in-depth in the SOCOM article. Simply redirect the term "Special Operations Group" to the "SOCOM" article. Batman2005 18:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Which is why I voted redirect, not merge. Night Gyr 15:15, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

• Redirect, per Night Gyr's reasons. --OneEuropeanHeart 02:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect, same as above. --Nkcs 02:15, 18 February 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.