Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Excelsior Field

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 merge to Gettysburg Battlefield. There is a clear consensus, that a separate article for this battle isn't warranted. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 12:23, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excelsior Field[edit]

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

Seems to lack enough notability to justify its own article. Wild Wolf (talk) 22:07, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/merge This and other locations at the battle of Gettysburg are documented in numerous works such as Gettysburg: a battlefield guide. Whether they should be split into separate articles or be sections of a larger article is a matter of ordinary editing not deletion per our editing policy. Warden (talk) 11:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Being fought over by two or three regiments does not make this notable enough, since there were dozens of other places on the Gettysburg battlefield (and several hundred Civil War battlefields for that matter) which were fought over by two or three regiments. 76.7.231.130 (talk) 01:16, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets all the same notability criteria identified here. Target for Today (talk) 20:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 06:05, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/Merge to Gettysburg Battlefield. Agree with User:76.7.231.130. Every tiny bit of the battlefield doesn't need a special article to its own. Unless the article creator can prove that the posession of this field was vital to the outcome of the battle, this article is not necessary. Mad Man American (talk) 22:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Gettysburg Battlefield. Similar observations as to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anderson's assault. No need to get into this much detail. 67.239.100.244 (talk) 17:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Gettysburg Battlefield. 198.252.15.202 (talk) 19:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A properly documented location on the battlefield, with guidance for modern visitors to the field. --DThomsen8 (talk) 22:35, 25 January 2012 (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.