Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Karánsebes


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:05, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Battle of Karánsebes

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

There are literally no reliable sources for this incident's existence. The two books that mention it are in no way acceptable as a source. They are both taken from the work of a 19th century publicist who is essentially unknown and wrote 50 years after the incident allegedly occurred. One might mention that this article deserves to exist because even if the incident did not occur, it still exists in the public consciousness as evidenced by the existence of the two books. However this is not the case, it doesn't exist in the public consciousness, both the books come from small publishers and are completely at odds with normal practice for writing history (one does not even include citations, the other has extremely sloppy footnotes). I urge anyone who is considering voting "keep" to do a minimal amount of research about this incident. The fact that so few sources exist for a modern (after 1500) incident that supposedly claimed so many lives is absolutely inconceivable. For anyone that is considering voting keep because the article exists in other languages, I would like to point out that these other articles use the same exact sources (or translations of) and were possibly created with English translation software. The fact that this article has existed for six years is a travesty to everything that Wikipedia hopes to represent. For those that think the article should continue to exist to explain why it is mentioned at all, I only point to the Wikipedia original research policy. - Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 06:32, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Concur with nominator's analysis and direction regarding anybody looking at this article. I should hope that a source merely existing as a book doesn't automatically render it the qualification of "reliable." Given the nature of the event -- which would be a staggering, almost hideously comical "battle" -- it is, and I use this word intentionally, incredible that we have such a dearth of sources beyond one book and one book quoting another book. I haven't found any additional sourcing in a bit of casual searching on the topic. If anybody else finds something more convincing than the current sources, I'll happily change my vote. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  07:30, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per my nomination.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 08:49, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * weak delete. May need more research but really doubtful about the outcome... The few sources I checked say the same: the Austrians, indeed, marched through Karansebes, twice. They retreated in disarray. Nothing worth of note. The number of losses reported during the retreat (the whole march, not just Karansebes) doesn't seem abnormal - they'd lose just as many to diarrhea and desertion without any enemy in sight. East of Borschov 09:35, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as the claim of 10,000 deaths is not in Gross-Hoffinger, the date is wrong, and there is no evidence that this panic was a notable event worthy of being called "The Battle of Karánsebes", just one embarrassing incident during the course of a long campaign. Karánsebes was not captured as a result of the incident. If anyone can find the "Austrian Military Magazine of 1831" referred to by Schlosser, it may be possible to incorporate information into another article and then redirect (to make recreation of this article less likely). Xanthoxyl  &lt; 10:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The Östreichische militärische Zeitschrift is online at googlebooks. It seems that what you're looking for is not in the 1831 volume but in 1837! There's an anonymous account of Karansebes episode (pp. 297-301). Good luck with blackletter print. East of Borschov 16:18, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for showing me that. It is actually quoting from the first volume of the memoirs of this individual, Auguste de Marmont. Voyage du maréchal duc de Raguse vol.1 p.108 is apparently the original source of the claim of 10,000 dead and wounded during the retreat which in any case does not match other accounts.  Marmont also says that the Emperor increased the confusion by firing cannons. This is presented as a morality tale: "So we see that each man should stick to his profession: that sovereigns should reign, ministers govern, generals command troops and fight; and that sovereigns should neither govern nor fight unless Heaven has bestowed upon them a capacity for governance or a genius for command and for combat." The date of the incident is given as 1789, there is no mention of brandy in the memoir, and even Marmont does not style it "The Battle of Karánsebes" or anything similar. The Austrian magazine quotes from previous issues and says that while losses of materiel were considerable, and several officers were shot and killed, no more than 563 men were missing, that most were eventually found, and attributes the difficulties in assessing what happened to engagements with the enemy before and after the panic.  Xanthoxyl  &lt; 18:12, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Outstanding, Xanthoxyl & East of Borschov. Mr Stephen (talk) 09:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom.--Silent Bob (talk) 12:09, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete We can't take chances on hoaxes, and as always, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:05, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 28 August 2010 (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.