Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1989 Swiss Army order of battle (2nd nomination)

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. Numerically and per strength of argument: this article remains substantially unsourced, and WP:V as well as WP:N are strong arguments for deletion. The "keep" side makes no policy-based arguments to contest that. That the creator is checkuser-blocked and banned also does not inspire confidence. Sandstein 20:51, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1989 Swiss Army order of battle

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence that the 1989 Swiss order of battle is notable, doesn't seem to have received significant attention as such.

This is a followup nomination after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1989 Portuguese Armed Forces order of battle, a group nomination where it was indicated that separate nominations would be better.

There also was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1989 Swiss Army order of battle from 2 years ago, which ended as keep (though with strong calls to source it). The article has not been improved since, and the sources which are there are not really about the 1989 order in the first place, and not very impressive otherwise (e.g. the "the-northrop-f-5-enthusiast-page" indicating that the first post-cold-war reorganisation happened in 1995-1996[1]). Fram (talk) 09:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 09:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 09:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 09:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All army groups have an order of battle, which is relevant in time of war. Notability is not inherited, so whatever decisions are made about other nations and other armies with Order of Battle, are not relevant here. -- Whiteguru (talk) 10:11, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not seeing SIGCOV in multiple RS that satisfies WP:GNG. I am not convinced that an order of battle serves any purposes without a battle and don't accept that 1989 is in any way significant, even as the end of the Cold War which Switzerland arguably wasn't a part of. Mztourist (talk) 10:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, when broken down by year this borders on an indiscriminate collection of information. Geschichte (talk) 17:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep: This was discussed thoroughly at the failed group nomination Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1989 Portuguese Armed Forces order of battle and the overwhelming consensus was keep. Based on that this should be a SNOW close. // Timothy :: talk 22:12, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually based on the discussion there the Nom was advised to withdraw and resubmit separate AFDs, which they have done starting with this one. Mztourist (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mztourist, thanks for letting me know, I thought the group ended as keep. Fram, sorry for my incorrect assumption. // Timothy :: talk 11:18, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Can you, for clarity, ~~strike out~~ your !vote? No problem if you add a reasoned "keep" (or preferably delete ;-) ) as well of course. Fram (talk) 12:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done :) Best wishes from Los Angeles

Keep: 1989 was a key point in the Cold War (the very end). This was obviously a notable event of a notable subject. This article is part of the history of that key event/subject. The order of battle is significant to military history. Just as Cold War shouldn't have all the available information. We use WP:SUMMARYSTYLE to drill down deeper into a subject/event. Something such as Cold War >> Switzerland >> Swiss Army >> Order of Battle. It's a list article with significant information about a notable event. I admit I don't have sources, but I think how this fits into our coverage will show it has value and that deleting it would diminish that subject/event. // Timothy :: talk 18:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: what makes 1989 any more significant than 1956 (Hungary), 1961 (Berlin), 1968 (Czechoslovakia) or 1981-4 (Pershing II)? Do we really need ORBATs of every European country at different points throughout the Cold War? What exactly does it add? Mztourist (talk) 05:49, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And what does it learn readers about the Cold War, or about 1989? Indicating the significance should be done (normally by independent sources) by showing what changed during that year, or compared to the previous or following year. A static picture of the order of battle learns me nothing at all about the Cold War, Switzerland in the Cold War, the impact the events of 1989 had on all of this, ... Essential information which would use too much space (or which would be WP:UNDUE in another article) can be spin off, but for that it has to be shown that it is essential information. Your 'drill down' is very nice, weren't it for the fact that the Swiss Army article doesn't even link to this article (in fact, the only article this is linked from is List of orders of battle). Fram (talk) 07:18, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deete - Seems too arbitrary a time point to be worth representing as a separate article. Agricolae (talk) 14:29, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- My question on this is how far the 1989 order of battle differs from that of 2020. I suspect the answer is not much. If so, this is a harmless article. If we were going to have siblings for other years, I would object to its existence. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:49, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Agricolae, Mztourist. WP:NOT (t · c) buidhe 23:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As stated above, 1989 was an important year for military history, hence these lists. The fact Switzerland wasn't technically involved in the Cold War is irrelevant. It prepared for the fallout from the Cold War just as any other country did. Its forces were much stronger then than they are now, just like any other country which might have been affected by the Cold War. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:56, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above, what makes 1989 any more important for military history than 1956, 1961, 1968 or 1981-4? Mztourist (talk) 12:49, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- Feel free to present the sources that support your "keep" for this specific article, as for the moment there are none. Furthermore, the article does nothing to demonstrate this importance or how 1989 was so drastically different compared to 1990 for the Swiss order of battle. Fram (talk) 13:56, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I believe that's already been sufficiently explained above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:55, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Considering that no one in this discussion has presented a source, I'll take that as a "no" and hope that the closing admin will weigh your !vote accordingly. Fram (talk) 15:08, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1989 Swiss Army order of battle (2nd nomination)

1989 Swiss Army order of battle

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.