Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pathfinder Platoon

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 merge---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:06, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pathfinder Platoon[edit]

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

This is a 30 man unit of the 16 Air Assault Brigade. There are no reliable sources that confirm the information in the article. and as its a military sub unit it would be better mergd into the parent article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim Sweeney (talk • contribs) 09:36, 29 March 2010

Keep Its inherent notability is also reinforced by the fact that it has been the subject of at least two TV documentaries (Defence of the Realm and Sky's more recent efforts). As to size even today is established at rather larger than 30 men and it carries on the tradition of several companies from the second world war. The unit has a unique role and incorporating into an article on 16 Air Assault would unbalance such an article and would be dubious anyway given the pathfinders' previous service with 1 and 6 Divs, 16 and 44 Bdes and 5 Bde.Tragino (talk) 16:49, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete OR Merge with 16 AA Brigade even though I have tried to add reliable sources to the article. I still believe it is not notable, as only a platoon of 30 men (need a source to prove otherwise). This platoon has no connection with the 1st Airborne Division or the 6th Airborne Division. Whose pathfinder units were the 21st Independent Parachute Company and the 22nd Independent Parachute Company. The post war 16th Parachute Brigade had the No. 1 Guards Independent Parachute Company as its pathfinder unit which went onto become G Squadron Special Air Service. I may be wrong but I don't think it has ever been deployed as a unit by itself but always as part of a larger formation 16th Air Assault Brigade. Other much larger units in 16 AA Brigade do not have their own articles. Its not mentioned at all on the British Army's Parachute Regiment page [1] and on 16 AA Bde's page its called the Pathfinder Group--Jim Sweeney (talk) 17:40, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Recce force lead elements are now attached to most Bde HQ elements so I'd question notability. Availability of reliable sources is open to debate as well. ALR (talk) 13:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination repaired by -- saberwyn 04:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC) -- saberwyn 04:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:34, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: redirect to parent formation and merge (but only so much as not to unbalance the parent article). I don't feel it is a large enough organisation to be notable by itself, particularly as it is not really capable of indepedent operations. (Usually we set the bar at battalion level, although some coy/sqn level units are notable and conversely, some bn level units are not notable.) — AustralianRupert (talk) 07:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is there any mileage in an article about the Bde HQ element, we also have 216 Parachute Squadron Royal Signals which probably isn't justified either and if we dug around there's probably something similar for the Para chefs et al. ALR (talk) 11:14, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep (or Merge) - sources do exist, such as [2],[3],[4] - I'm not sure how reliable they are, but a Google Books search also finds some coverage. This doesn't appear to be a hugely notable sub-unit though, so I wouldn't object to a merge into 16 Air Assault Brigade, which might be the most appropriate move here. Robofish (talk) 21:20, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the article with the parent unit. I would also recommend the redirect go to the generic article for pathfinders as the title is fairly generic. There are almost certainly pathfinder platoons in other armies. Movementarian (Talk) 23:20, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with parent unit's article. An obviously notable organization that has garnered substantial independent coverage and mention they are still a small group whose existence is defined by the larger structure of its parent unit. This is demonstrated by the fact that most refs cite the subject not as an independent entity but a piece of the larger Brigade force. TomPointTwo (talk) 23:47, 6 June 2010 (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.