Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Tlemcen 1330
- 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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:41, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Battle of Tlemcen 1330
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Battle of Tlemcen 1330 (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)
Inadequately sourced item which has been moved to and from draft without improvement. The only source seems to point to a landing page for an Arabic bibliography. The recent return to main by the creator states 'no problem with article'; the community may differ and to avoid 'move-warring' a discussion is now warranted. 'Naive' search revealed no additional coverage. Eagleash (talk) 22:04, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. Shellwood (talk) 22:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete -- certainly a very poor article, with no dates, thus deserving such TNT. I would have expected there also to be sources on the history of Genoa cited if this was to become a worthwhile article. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: Fails GNG. A common naval skirmish. No IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. The "source" in the article is not enough to support the cotnent in the article, nothing to possibly merge and I don't believe this is a good redirect. // Timothy :: talk 07:33, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.URALGAME (talk) 10:23, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete - Can't find enough in-depth coverage to show it passes ]
- 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.