Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of salyersville


 * 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, with no prejudice against Huon's test version at User:Huon/Test being used instead, at the proper name of Battle of Salyersville. Deathphoenix ʕ 03:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Battle of salyersville
There are no sources for this battle. "Battle of Salyersville" produces 2 Ghits, both of which seem to refer to an event in 1862, not 1863. The service history of the 14th Kentucky infantry shows only a Union defeat a few days earlier. The National Park Service's list of battles also does not contain this one. Even the Magoffin County Historical Society's website does not mention it. Considering the massive casualties claimed (almost 200 dead, which would probably translate to more than a thousand total casualties), this total lack of evidence is highly unlikely. Delete as probable hoax. Huon 14:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[keep]] maby less casualties happend and the year might be off i was just going by my grand fathers old storys that his grandpa told him about my great great great grand pa who was actually in the battle of salyersville dont delete the deaths could easily have been exagerated over the years and i guesed at the month. so keep it and change it some im actually frome magoffin and i know they were a battle of salyersville but soldiers storys are often exagerated it was suposed to have happend before the battle of puncheon creek like a few hours before it but it did happen just change the date and year.]] [us men from back here aint bad for lying i promise me and many people belive the event happend its part of local folklore of the area.] [my pa also told me that they were a unioun recruting station at one end of salyersville and a confederate station at the other] [what does per nom mean] if any one wants to know more about the battle like men that were in it just type who were there and ill tell you. one man that was in it my ancestor i talked about was william jenkins a private in the 3rd ky mtd rifles csa he went home after his unit was dissolved later in the war.] other relatives i have that were in it was my 5thgreat uncles stephen and martin howard. and my 4th uncle who was unioun that disserted there william howard.]
 * Weak KeepDuring the Civil War many battles were fought in the wilderness, with the opposing forces not sure where they were, particularly in relation to arbitrary county lines. A battle may be known by more than one name. This could have happened, but a clearer reference to verifiable sources is needed.Edison 15:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The article indeed gives an alternative name, "Battle of Ivy Point Hill". There are two Ghits for "Ivy Point Hill", one of which is Wikipedia. Neither says anything about a battle on December 4, 1863. The National Park Service has no battle in December 1863 for all of Kentucky. Sure, this could have happened (although I then would suspect serious flaws in the numbers given), but how are we to verify it? --Huon 15:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment We shouldn't give benefit of the doubt for non-verified content on Wikipedia. Huon seems to have done sufficient research. I can't find anything in google books on these supposed battles (only found mention of a 1864 skirmish at "Half Mountain" south of Salyersville" which left 60 CSA dead with only slight USA casualties). Bwithh 22:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom Bwithh 22:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow, eat your heart out, Ken Burns... Bwithh 00:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment "per nom" means "by the nominator's reasoning". Unfortunately, you just admitted that the article is founded on hearsay, which hardly counts as a reliable source and thus is unsuited for Wikipedia. It's not about truth, but verifiability. --Huon 07:29, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[keep] you should not delete it just because its not in the national archives the archives only contian important strategic battles not minnor battles such as this one. [if it is deleted put it in a diffirent category such as legonds of the civil war or little known battles. [if you guys would agree we could have a reenactment at the site to prove wether a battle could have been fought there but wee have to have the 14thkyregiment and other reenactment units to do this and we could put it on television.old men dont always tell the truth to little kids ..go to user page samuel purtee for more information.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Samuel purtee (talk • contribs) 16:53, September 23, 2006 (UTC) Samuel purtee 22:00, 23 September 2006 (UTC) [have any of you ever been to this area prestonsburg is only 20 miles frome salyersville. and history references cant always be belived a lot is left out. [samuel purtees last sentence] well think about it this way i wont agree to delete my history how would you agree to delete yours if you must then delete this article and make one about the battle of half mountian.frome samuel purtee i quit arguing with you city slikers. and i apologise for trying to expose some little unkown history about my home town.
 * Weak Keep - Assertions should be challenged and deleted and then the article should be brought back as an AfD. Seems to assert its own notability adequately (although this needs sourcing).  JASpencer 08:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as not verifiable and original research. Nothing the Official Records for December 1863, and nothing very close to Salyersville (unless Prestonburg is "really close") for 1862. Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:42, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

from [sam purtee] i agree with you huon lets use your draft for the article but if we change the name lets call it the battle of ivy point hillSamuel purtee 22:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)samuel purtee
 * Comment - I just made a draft of what an article about the battle might look like. My version is still suspect (because I don't trust the Union reports I based this version on - the Confederate strength may be exaggerated), but at least there is a source, and this engagement really happened - though probably not under the name "Battle of Salyersville". My suggestion would be to either delete the current verion or turn it into a redirect, and to create Battle of Paintsville in its stead (a name that still sees extremely little use). --Huon 11:15, 24 September 2006 (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.