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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 08:17, 9 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Operation Excess (Rhodesia)

Operation Excess (Rhodesia) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

The main section, titled "The Operation" is not written as though it were an encyclopedia entry. It's promotional, and cites sources that are not cited correctly. (Wood 2008, Binda 2008) Not only are there no citations, but the notability is shaky as there is no mention in secondary sources. Oh, and it's copied from here. _{Vermont | reply here} 11:03, 1 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: The Wood book seems to be this. _{Vermont | reply here} 13:35, 1 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost ( talk) 06:20, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost ( talk) 06:20, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost ( talk) 06:20, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Comment - I tweaked the URL in the note.-- Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 17:39, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete - (or, as a fallback, redirect to article cited in the nomination text); this reads to me like a small, insignificant unit action involving one force whose commander and strength are unknown and another whose commander and unit ID are not known.-- Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 17:53, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete - I read it, and it seems like a copy/paste from a text book and actually sounds like it came straight from a book on Rhodesian history, so much so that it sounds like a story. Based on this, I cannot find any reason to keep the article unless that entire section is rewritten and cited correctly. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 09:20, 5 February 2018 (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.