Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1935 in Philippine military and law enforcement

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 speedy delete. Article has already been speedily deleted. (non-admin closure) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1935 in Philippine military and law enforcement

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

This seems like serious overkill to me, and looking at these recent edits to the navigation template many, many more articles are planned. While the 1941-1945 articles may perhaps be defended as exceptional years, all that happened in 1935 was the Sakdalista uprising. 1935 in the Philippines is all that is needed. Fram (talk) 09:58, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:16, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not notable for stand alone article; several short mentioned events during that year can be mentioned in the Philippines article in relation to their history. Kierzek (talk) 14:37, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This content fork is not sufficient to be a stand alone article. Make sure it is already covered by 1935 in the Philippines and then delete. EricSerge (talk) 15:01, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge what is needed, and then delete. Highly redundant and unlikely to be a valid search term. Bearian (talk) 20:00, 25 October 2016 (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.