Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of highest military decorations

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. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 02:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of highest military decorations[edit]

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

This article is unreferenced and an orphan. At the moment it is little more than a list of pictures. Instead of a list, why not use the template - Highest Awards for gallantry IMO this list serves no purpose and has little value at the moment Gbawden (talk) 12:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. No valid reason for deletion has been offered. This could easily be expanded, e.g. number of recipients, etc. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep AfD is not cleanup. Problems that can be solved by editing are not a reason to delete, per deletion policy. -- cyclopia^speak! 09:00, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Clarityfiend. Nice article, needs expanding etc. Just because it is an orphan is not reason to delete. Martin451 (talk) 10:41, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have expanded it into a table, and added a few entries and some data.Martin451 (talk) 16:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No valid reason for deletion given. Everything listed is a blue link, people able to find out more information about each entry by clicking that. Dream Focus 14:22, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article describes a topic that clearly meets notability requirements and contains no inherently unfixable violations. Honestly, this will make a fine list once its been expanded.Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:54, 17 July 2013 (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.