Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World War II letters from Atlantic Union College student soldiers

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. postdlf (talk) 03:12, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

World War II letters from Atlantic Union College student soldiers[edit]

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

The author clearly proposes to publish a selection of original letters. This is essentially source material and belongs on the college's own website. The tone is unencyclopedic. There is also a tendency toward Wikipedia is not for memorials violation. (There would probably be no kobjection to a separate, well referenced biography of G. Eric Jones.) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:17, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless this archive of letters has been discussed in depth in reliable sources independent of the archive. The letters should be made available by the college for research by historians. At this time, they do not appear notable. Cullen328 (talk) 22:30, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:09, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy into User:DanLuis23? I agree with that has been said above. Some of the existing material would probably be useful to keep around for the author's other work. It might also be useful in writing a future article at G. Eric Jones, although the current tone isn't really appropriate for an encyclopedia. Melchoir (talk) 00:12, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. —Nick-D (talk) 00:22, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - there's no indication that this collection of letters is notable and the article isn't encyclopedic (Wikipedia isn't a repository of original documents). The letters themselves may be useful additions to Wikisource, but even that's unclear. While not directly relevant to this discussion, the article also contains some obvious factual errors. Nick-D (talk) 00:22, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Obviously created in good faith, but Wikipedia is simply the wrong place for this article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 00:51, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and strongly suggest to article creator that this project would be better off on its own website. This is interesting stuff, but Wikipedia isn't the place for it. --NellieBly (talk) 02:39, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom: violates WP:OR/WP:RS/WP:SELFPUB, WP:NOT#OR, WP:NOTMEMORIAL, and fails WP:GNG. bahamut0013^words _deeds 14:40, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 17:31, 12 April 2011 (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.