Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skirmish at Adam's Bluff
- 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. czar 03:34, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Skirmish at Adam's Bluff
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Skirmish at Adam's Bluff (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Working through
]- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Talk 01:24, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Talk 01:24, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arkansas-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Talk 01:24, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Delete. Dyer's Compendium table of battles by date for Arkansas, p. 673, 3 pages after the citation to the index of battles for Arkansas, shows that the ISBN 978-0-8061-4087-2. This book has several pages of text about the prelude to the battle in which a few preliminary encounters are mentioned and a 28-page chapter on the battle in which the 43rd Indiana is mentioned several times but says nothing about the action on June 30. This lack of notice of the June 30 skirmish at Adams Bluff by these two sources indicates that the action was not important to the Battle of Helena and not notable enough to have a separate article. In fact, it also seems quite doubtful that any more information about the skirmish can be found. Donner60 (talk) 10:52, 28 June 2021 (UTC)]
- @Johnpacklambert: I may have been too careless with the dates for Adam's Bluff and Helena in my comments. I think my conclusion is correct since Mark K. Christ does not mention Adam's Bluff in his book about the Civil War in Arkansas. I will amend the comments as soon as I get it completely straightened out. I now think that Adam's Bluff actually was a skirmish that took place in Samuel Curtis's followup to the Battle of Pea Ridge in the year before the Battle of Helena, but is still not notable. I wanted to add this cautionary note so that the mistake will not have more weight than it should as I finish double checking this. Sorry about that. I was careful about reviewing the Christ book but reading the fine print in Dyer late at night may not have been the best idea especially when the same regiment was involved in both Adam's Bluff and Helena. Donner60 (talk) 22:42, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Johnpacklambert: I checked E.B. Long’s book on the Civil War Day-by-Day to be sure I had checked the correct date for the Adam’s Bluff skirmish. I had. So again, Long does not mention it. I had checked the index as well as the section about the Battle of Helena in the Christ book and Adam’s Bluff is not indexed at any place. Also, Dyer shows no casualties for the 43rd Indiana Infantry Regiment at the skirmish. The mistake was that I connected it as a possible event that took place just before the Battle of Helena in 1863. It wasn’t. But I think the overall analysis and conclusion was correct because that mistake was not a material fact in coming to the conclusion. As usual, Hog Farm's analysis that the skirmish was connected to the White River expedition is correct and I also should have noted that, and the date, more carefully.
- In short, after the ISBN 978-0-8078-4669-8. But the Adam’s Bluff skirmish, which presumably took place in the march along the White River, is not mentioned in that book either. Sorry for the long further explanation but I thought I should clear up the mistake, even though the conclusion is the same. Donner60 (talk) 23:51, 28 June 2021 (UTC)]
- Delete per Donner60's very well reasoned explanation as to why this event to the extent it even happened was not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:05, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per the exhaustive analysis of sources explained above. It clearly does not meet the GNG. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:11, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- 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.