Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Issus (622)


 * 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   rename to Heraclius' campaign of 622. If a rename is all it takes to prevent the deletion of otherwise good content, then it should be renamed rather than deleted per WP:ATD. Please feel free to clean the article up and remove any offending content. This is certainly not a binding resolution; feel free to rename it to something else if desired. If there is disagreement over the name, then please start a requested move discussion on the talk page. -Scottywong | chat _ 17:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Issus (622)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

No sources and it seems to be a fictitious battle. The German interwiki version was nominated for deletion yesterday and there editors being knowledgeable on the subject argue that historical sources only mention the campaign but not this specific battle same. This also applies for the Qu'ran sure given in the article and no no modern literature on the involved parties has any information on this alleged battle.--Kmhkmh (talk) 11:26, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:01, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:03, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Update: The German WP already went ahead and deleted it in an unanimous decision (see de:Wikipedia:Löschkandidaten/3._Mai_2012).--Kmhkmh (talk) 22:24, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Not a fictitious battle. That is a very degrading and insulting statement that is thankfully wrong. See Byzantine-Sassanid War of 602-628 for starters. --LutherVinci (talk) 00:52, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Not sure what exacly is degrading there, but be that as it may.
 * The WP section you point to unfortunately is unfortunately not as clear cut as it seems to be. The only source that really seems to be speaking of "the battle at issus" is Omar which is from the 1893 so rather outdated. Kaegi, a more recent source used there as well however just mentions the campaign of Heraclius to secure Anatolia and speaks of several clashes with the Persians, but he does not mention a particular battle at Issus. Note the issue is only the historicity of this specific battle and not Heraclius' campaign, the existence of which is not in question as it well documented in historical sources and recent academic literature.--Kmhkmh (talk) 03:27, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * What about the other Norwich 1997 source? Also the point that you mentioned can be solved by renaming the article to something like "Campaigns at Issus (622)". Taha (talk) 06:43, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well my primary concern was the lack of sources of the original article combined with deletion decision in de.wp and the arguments there. If we rename the article to (Heraclius') Campaign of 622 then the problem would certainly be resolved as well and that's fine with. With the current article I'm still wary about relying on Omar and with the name (third) battle at Issus. Norwich seems to be ok as a source (as more recent scholarly work), but i couldn't verify its actual content, i.e. what writes exactly. If he indeed did the term battle of Issus that would resolve the issue as well.--Kmhkmh (talk) 09:02, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry guys. I didn't read the discussion above and added some material from "Byzantine–Sassanid War of 602–628" article. Taha (talk) 06:43, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Update II: I found a hint in a modern source that somewhat explains the issue. Apparently traditionally historians assumed a battle at Issus during Hercalius' campaign of 622. However that view seems to have been revised in the 20th century (see Dictionary of Battles and Sieges, p. XVI). This would explain why sources from around 1900 or earlier carry the term whereas more modern sources have dropped it. In that light of that and the recent article improvements, I'd argue for simply changing the name as suggest above already and further improving it with respect to its sources (removing Omar in particular). After that we can keep it.--Kmhkmh (talk) 09:20, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

]
 * Read J. B. Bury's commentary on Gibbon here: The battle mentioned in the text concluded the campaign; but its site cannot be fixed. There was no fighting in Cilicia; nor does Cilicia appear in the campaign. 10.1177/096834459900600101 p. 14-15 might be helpful as well. --HHill (talk) 12:11, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Exactly. The sources (George of Pisidia, Theophanes, Pseudo-Sebeos etc) don't mention a battle at Issus. Modern historians (cf. especially W. Kaegi, Heraclius, Cambridge 2003, pp. 100ff. - it is the best modern account of the campaign and he doesn't mention Issus!) have proven that Heraclius left Constantinople for Pylae at the Marmara Sea. From there he lead a campaign in northern Asia Minor (622/23) - not in Cilicia! --Benowar (talk) 23:24, 6 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 11 May 2012 (UTC)


 * No Battle of Issus in Norwich 1997. I checked the German translation today, he locates a battle somewhere in Cappadocia. The article discussed here needs to be renamed and rewritten, if it is not to be deleted. --HHill (talk) 18:44, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Year 622 requires far more detailed study because it is the year Muslim calendar starts. A battle between Rome and Persia that year seems to be critically important for understanding the beginnings of Islam. Do not delete. Tom Holland In the Shadow of the Sword. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.12.187.38 (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2012 (UTC) — 82.12.187.38 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * You're asuming that such a battle existed, which it appears it does not. - The Bushranger One ping only 15:06, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Some clarification here. We cannot go by what battle may or mot not be important in some religion but we have to go what historical sciences/research provides. And there we have old some old and outdated sources (before 1900) mentioning the battle, while all newer sources merely mentioning the campaign of 622 and a (possible) battle with Persians but not at Issus (Cilicia) but in Cappadocia instead. Hence we either rewrite the article and change its name to something like "Heraclius' campaign of 622" or we simply delete the article, but it cannot stay as it is, since the current name and parts of its content are plain wrong.--Kmhkmh (talk) 06:13, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: If its true that modern scholarship questions/debunks whether this battle occurred, it doesn't necessarily follow that this article should be deleted, since there would be a long history of people thinking it happened, which is notable itself.  And I do still see it being referenced, see, e.g.,  (2007 book referring to Issus as one of four major battles fought by Heraclius).  So that would suggest the article needs improvement and not deletion.--Milowent • hasspoken  17:44, 21 May 2012 (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.