Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Lebanese Army Martyrs during Nahr el Bared Operation

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. MBisanz ^talk 03:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Lebanese Army Martyrs during Nahr el Bared Operation[edit]

Seems to be an example of overlistification; a list of every casualty of a particular conflict, most of whom would be considered non-notable? The title, in addition, is blatantly POV (although assuming good faith it may just have been titled such due to the title of the reference). Ironholds (talk) 10:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as unacceptably POV title. Mangoe (talk) 11:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:NOT#MEMORIAL, WP:NOTDIR and POV issues.--Boffob (talk) 12:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have retitled the page to List of Lebanese Army soldiers killed during Nahr el Bared Operation to avoid WP:NPOV violation. JulesH (talk) 22:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a memorial and while the title has been improved, the article is still strongly POV. Edward321 (talk) 02:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Point of view notwithstanding, "Wikipedia is not a memorial." That's one of the core rules of what Wikipedia is not, and although it may seem harsh or insensitive, it is meant to apply universally, regardless of where the victims were from, regardless of how they died. It's a bar to lists of persons killed in a battle, whether in 2006 or 1866; persons who were killed by a bomb or by an earthquake; the wealthy or the poor; persons who were on "our side" or "their side". That's just the way it is.Mandsford (talk) 03:15, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Mandsford above. And honestly, this article is so far out in left field that if I saw it on the recent changes list, I would have looked at it thinking it was a vandal screwing around creating ridiculous pages. Trusilver 00:45, 9 December 2008 (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.