Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strategic Air Command Missiles

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 no consensus. Mailer Diablo 15:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be a CSD-A1 case: it lacks context to make it understandable. Nevertheless, it is long and detailed, so it has encyclopedicness (it's a word!) on its side. It might need to go, to clean-up, to be renamed, to be merged... and the original nominator didn't know as s/he left it orphaned. I'd like the community - and experts in the subject if possible - to decide on. Thanks. No opinion from me, obviously. ➨ ЯEDVERS 19:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete listcruft. Is possibly a copyvio given the first line of the article and if wikipedia hasn't received such a notice. -- Koffieyahoo 03:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: How do you know it is a copyvio? --HResearcher 04:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as a useful and encyclopdedically notable list. but drastically clean up. Stubify if there are copyvio issues Bwithh 02:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and rename to Missiles of the Strategic Air Command. As far as I know, there shouldn't be a copyright issue, as this is only raw numbers. It obviously needs cleanup and some proper table markup, though. Kirill Lokshin 02:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Looks like we've got a duplicate article here. I'm pretty sure the content is the same; only one copy should be kept, obviously. Kirill Lokshin 03:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment put both Strategic Air Command Missiles and Missiles of the Strategic Air Command up as copyvio. -- Koffieyahoo 04:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Disagree, merge with the final article as Missiles of the Strategic Air Command. If there are copyvio issues then copyedit. --HResearcher 04:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Kirill (I think Missiles of the Strategic Air Command to be a better title, so I'll be supporting keep [and cleanup and/or stubify per Bwithh, et al.] at its AfD). Joe 19:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I observe that each article has been tagged for speedy (correctly, I think), so I suppose someone ought to undertake to retain whatever information isn't subject to copyright in a stub at one of these two names; at which title would one think such stubification to be appropriate? Joe 19:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Move per Kirill Lokshin's suggestion. --HResearcher 04:13, 4 August 2006 (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.