Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veteran with disputed status
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 delete. --bainer (talk) 11:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Veteran with disputed status
Closer's notes
Some searching reveals at least some of the text to be copied from an article by Bernard Edelman in the VVA Veteran magazine, January/February 2003 (can't find an online version at the moment) so a merger would not be appropriate.
No-one commenting here was opposed to having some coverage of the topic however, and as Edison suggested, that should probably be done in the veteran article. --bainer (talk) 11:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I can't believe this article even exists. Completely original research, cites no sources, unverified, and lists many living people by name. Delete. Crockspot 15:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm citing the OR issue here, but I also smell a rat - it almost has the flavor of a copyvio, but I can't find anything to substantiate said copyvio. CNN link is dead. Not really well written, feels patchworkish. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 15:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete: This isn't an article, its an editorial, completely unsourced. Its mindboggling that nobody has brought up this afd before.-Hal Raglan 17:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, WP:V, WP:NOR. While the topic is real, the article in its current form is unsalvageable. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 17:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- Redirect or Merge to Veteran. There are certainly numerous reliable sources about phony war heros, including politicians, who have been exposed as phonies with respect to their "heroic" war service. "Phony veteran" gets 618 Google hits. An example is the Tehachapi News article [1] about the FBI arresting phonies who claim to be Congressional Medal of Honor recipients. This topic should be covered in Wikipedia, but it could be part of the Veteran article. I disagree with the accusations of o.r. or copyvios, since the text is sourced to two news stories listed as external sources, but is not a direct cut and paste. Edison 18:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- Mergewith Veteran and have link to imposer These are not just people playing around, many organizations have been hurt by phonies. I can come up with several sources, see Lisa Jane Phillips. Phonies need to be exposed, just like any imposers, however this article could be part of the veteran and impostor articles. Lyta79 05:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. The phrase "veteran with disputed status" is a neologism which garners virtually no Google hits outside Wikipedia and its mirrors. The overall subject of people making false claims to military service is notable and verifiable, but I'm not sure where it should go in Wikipedia. --Metropolitan90 05:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete At best, the title of the article is wrong. jonathon 02:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- Retitle and reduce to stub.
- The present title of this article is very poor, as it presumes that alleged veterans are actual veterans; a better title might be “Disputed Claims of Military Service”.
- Some sort of article on such disputed claims would probably be a Good Thing. The present content of poor quality can be removed without deleting the whole article.
- 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.
