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. Renaming is at editor discretion.
RL0919 (
talk) 02:56, 8 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Lacks all notability. The name "Regiment University of the Free State" (title) or "Regiment University of the Orange Free State" (lead sentence) are never used. The actual name, "Regiment Universiteit Oranje-Vrystaat", is used in very few sources, associated with the military, or without real content
[1]. Even in these sources, the info is restricted to one sentence (
[2] page 27). Lacks all
notability.
Fram (
talk) 11:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)reply
1. So change it to Regiment Universiteit Oranje-Vrystaat — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
196.38.209.210 (
talk) 11:44, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
2. The fact that little is known about a unit doesn't make it irrelevant, it is a open invitation by wikipedians to help investigate and add to the body of knowledge of said unit.reply
And how is this all-but-forgotten short-lived reserve unit a "major unit"? And more importantly, since when does an essay trump our notability guidelines?
Fram (
talk) 04:27, 25 April 2019 (UTC)reply
"Major unit" is a military designation referring to units of battalion or regiment size ("minor units" being company-sized or smaller and "formations" being brigade-sized or above). It has nothing to do with how well-known it is. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 15:07, 25 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep Its not an essay. Its an article about a military unit that actually existed
Gbawden (
talk) 06:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC)reply
WP:MILUNIT is an essay, the page up for AFD obviously isn't. But "it existed" is not a sufficient reason to have or keep an article.
Fram (
talk) 08:28, 25 April 2019 (UTC)reply
It's an essay, but is still an accepted notability standard for military articles and has been accepted as such at AfD for many years. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 15:07, 25 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep as an article that needs improvement, but that is about an actual military unit.
E.M.Gregory (
talk) 00:52, 30 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Why does everybody consider "actual military unit" as something that gives automatic notability, exempt from normal sourcing expectations?
Fram (
talk) 04:30, 30 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Because those of us who know something about military history appreciate that "major units" (see above) should be seen as notable. The article isn't unsourced. Therefore it is presumed notable. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 08:09, 30 April 2019 (UTC)reply
That's an utter non-answer. A local consensus / argument fom authority ("those of us who know something about military history") doesn't trump the global consensus of
WP:N. "The article isn't unsourced. Therefore it is presumed notable." is making a mockery of what "notable" means on enwiki.
Fram (
talk) 08:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)reply
You basically seem to be arguing that
WP:MILUNIT, which has always been held to be relevant at AfD, should be ignored in this case (or maybe all cases) because you don't agree with it. Notability is determined by common sense, precedent and discussion, not strict rules, and yes, that does include the contribution of editors who know what they're talking about. That's why we have AfDs and not just deletion without discussion based on a strict set of criteria. The article is not unsourced. It is about a regiment-sized unit. It should be held to be notable. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 09:25, 1 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanztalk 20:19, 30 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment. A regiment can be very big or quite small. I think that a military unit made up of students and alumni from a single university would be relatively small, even during wartime. But that's just speculation on my part; if the South African military called it a regiment rather than a ROTC unit, then it’s a regiment. Eastmain (
talk •
contribs) 20:30, 30 April 2019 (UTC)reply
A regiment in Commonwealth terms (i.e. a battalion equivalent) averages about 500-700 people. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 09:28, 1 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep and concur with possible renaming. Several independent sources exist, and the unit is notable per
WP:MILUNIT
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.