Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Civilian deaths by aerial bombing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Tone 15:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Civilian deaths by aerial bombing[edit]
- Civilian deaths by aerial bombing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
In the PROD that was removed I cited "No sources, poor criteria (aerial bombardment does not include "ground to ground long range missiles and rockets"), and very incomplete". User:The Bushranger said it "fails WP:OR and WP:INDISCRIMINATE, I'd say. Also a likely WP:POV magnet and, as noted, includes things that aren't aerial bombardment." User:Bahamut0013 said "In addition to the above, there is no way this list will ever be remotely close to complete." I agree with all of this. —Srnec (talk) 04:32, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per Bushranger. Impossible list to complete. Binksternet (talk) 08:24, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per Bushranger, impossible to complete. Information locatable elsewhere (such as in the articles mentioned) on the wiki. --123Hedgehog456 11:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: naturally, since I seconded the prod. I believe that the nomination rationale (and the prod retionale) still hold up. And, while it's not strictly related to this AfD, I have to vent: the constant de-prodding of worthless articles by a certain editor without any efforts to fix/improve them is getting quite tiresome. Thank you Srnec for the notice, as I had requested. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 18:20, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. —bahamut0013wordsdeeds 18:20, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per...myself? ;) My original reasoning stands. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:51, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per reasoning given in PROD. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:14, 15 February 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.