Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Urozhaine


 * 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__. Liz Read! Talk! 05:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Battle of Urozhaine

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

This is getting excessive. Yet another content fork article of a non-battle in this war. Uncountable such articles have been deleted already, see Articles for deletion/Battle of Tokmak, Articles for deletion/Battle of Chuhuiv, Articles for deletion/Battle of Dvorichna, Articles for deletion/Battle of Krasnohorivka, Articles for deletion/2024 Russian offensive, Articles for deletion/Battle of Orlivka. Measures should be taken against users continously recreating content forks and lacking the capacity of discerning if a topic is notable or not.

Fighting at Urozhaine is not notable nor relevant enough for having an article of its own. It can be covered in any other article such as Southern Ukraine campaign or Urozhaine. There was already fighting in the village last year and it was covered at 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive. The content of this article is already pretty ridiculous, it is said "Little is known for the battle itself" so I don't know why do we have an article for it ("as it just started"; see WP:DEADLINE). This battle over a small settlement is very unlikely to become notable in the future, and if it does the time for having an article will be then and not now. Also a source from 25 April 2024 is given to confirm territorial changes of the battle that supposedly started on 1 May. Super  Ψ   Dro  12:43, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Russia,  and Ukraine.  Super   Ψ   Dro  12:43, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  17:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Clerical comment: Article was nominated for deletion (AFD) less than 2 hours after creation, with no clear WP:BEFORE considerations. As of this comment, article is sourced two secondary reliable sources. WP:RAPID attempt at deletion, partially using WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST rational in said rapid deletion attempt. This is not a comment regarding a keep or delete, just clerical to establish a brief timeline. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Doesn't really matter. The article is clearly not notable, so it should be deleted. I don't get the "WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST" thing, I have just shown that this topic area is prone to repeated creation of non-notable content. Super   Ψ   Dro  07:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I support deletion of this article per WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. The term "Battle of Urozhaine" does not exist in reliable sources. The ISW-CTP citations here say nothing of a "battle of" or "battle for" the location and only make passing mentions of combat in the region. The NYT citation here does not mention Urozhaine either. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 04:59, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep Better sourcing is needed rather than an article deletion Salfanto (talk) 18:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Salfanto has a huge record of creating problematic articles. Evidence is their talk page full of notices . I am fairly convinced Salfanto does not have a good grasp of what notability is and they are voting to keep because deleting articles = bad. Super   Ψ   Dro  18:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * What I am trying to say is that editors should put more effort into improving articles rather than nominating to delete them all the time. Articles should only be deleted if they have no notability whatsoever. For example, if only a few sources mention the article's topic. Salfanto (talk) 19:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete There is little to no mention of notability in the article and the only information is basically “we don’t know because it’s still going on”/“it’s too early to tell” Cowinatree (talk) 11:51, 22 May 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.