Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2nd Battle of Yedaya


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Star  Mississippi  18:23, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

2nd Battle of Yedaya

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails GNG and NEVENT. Minorincident, No sources found showing this has WP:SIGCOV from WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth.  // Timothy :: talk  19:27, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete the refs provided are only skimpy passing mentions and I don’t see anything more substantial. Mccapra (talk) 20:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Just added another secondary source talking about the battle Check it out Yubudirsi (talk) 17:39, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Africa,  and Ethiopia.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  20:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting as if this closes as Soft Delete, it is likely to get immediately restored. Remember, editor participants, to BOLD your "vote" of what you are arguing should occur with this article. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:38, 18 January 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:27, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No assumptions were made on my page, I added secondary sources AND primary sources, none contradicts the other neither what I wrote, I can't seem to see my mistake so I asked other wikipedia editors to review my recent articles, still cant pinpoint a single mistake, recently all my articles I put hard work in were reported for deletion by SocialWave, please explain yourself in more detail Yubudirsi (talk) 08:15, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * The issue with all these battle articles is that while they are verifiable, they are not notable, because we do not have multiple independent sources discussing them in depth. Mccapra (talk) 12:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete The sources are not sufficient for a stand alone article. There isn't much in detail about the battle then a sentence or two. Socialwave597 (talk) 06:13, 1 February 2024 (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.