Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Combatives

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 keep‎. Clear consensus that purging the unsourced is preferable to deletion. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Combatives

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Combatives (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I PROD'd this article with the statement "I was going to remove the unsourced content but that is basically the entire article so instead I will tag it for Proposed deletion as Original research." The PROD tag was removed and it was suggested that I bring this to AFD. Undoubtedly, a decent article on this subject could be written but this version seems to be almost all original research on the subject with some bits taken from a military archived page. It would be nice if editors who focus on the military could take this article on as a writing project but we can't dictate to other editors how to spend their time. As an alternative, we could reduce this to a stub, keeping just the sections that are supported by sources. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:27, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:27, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

• Keep: per deletion is not cleanup Jack4576 (talk) 05:19, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• Convert to Stub per nom's alternative suggestion. At least a stub might attract some editorial attention. Intothatdarkness 16:47, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
• Keep and remove all uncited content. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 23:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
• Convert to a stub containing only the well-sourced information. -Ljleppan (talk) 08:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
• Reduce to stub per nom. I agree that leaving the article as a stub is better than deletion. CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:45, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

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.