Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/10th (Magdeburg) Hussars


 * 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   speedy keep. Per request (non-admin closure)  Jay  Jay What did I do? 17:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

10th (Magdeburg) Hussars

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I guess it is a google translation, with very strange sentences bordering on gibberish. The Banner talk 22:06, 30 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - the edit summaries, history, talk page note and discussion between the IP's talk page and mine explain that I created it to allow him to slowly (manually) translate from the German WP. Yes, needs work but that has been happening almost without pause since it was created. IP just used me (yay, collaboration) rather than AFC. Being a work in progress isn't really a valid reason for deletion but the discussion is fractured and I can't blame the nom for that. But I'd ask that he withdraw this as a misunderstanding. I don't think there's any doubt the subject is notable.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 22:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Please, use a draft page the next time. The Banner talk 10:05, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Absolutely mate - was a quick means to an end and was discussed extensively but, as I said, the discussion was all over the place so would have been hard to track. All good.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 10:47, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - The article needs some cleanup and better citations, probably by someone who speaks German as well as English, but it looks like it could be a good article. XeroxKleenex (talk) 22:54, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Thanks for the support. The article is an important part of history and is very notable as demonstrated by the German wiki article. The rationale to delete is unjustified as it is new article and very premature to the point that I consider it frivilous. I have been working with stalwart to translate the article. My German is rusty so it takes some time and the references did not come over well from Deutsch wikipedi. I also have a request on de.wiki for help translating. I also have some difficulty with referencing. I get it done but it takes some time. Again thank you for the support. 172.56.11.89 (talk) 00:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notability not in question, and apparently the translation efforts have progressed substantially.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 01:40, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable, and we have WP:Pages needing translation into English, where translations needing improvement can be listed; I have just done so. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:08, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Regiments, especially historic regiments which have seen combat, are generally considered to be notable. Needing work does not equal lack of notability. This is AfD, not cleanup. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:46, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Then start working on it instead of just criticizing an AfD. The Banner talk 10:05, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * No mate, that's your job. You lazily nominated it for deletion instead of bothering to do a bit of cleanup. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Request closure as speedy keep as nominator. Not that Necrorthesp managed to convince me (his approach is far too negative) but Yngvadottir pointed me at part of WP:Pages needing translation into English that I had missed. So the article get the benefit of the doubt. The Banner talk 10:05, 31 July 2014 (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.