Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casualties of Nat Turner's Rebellion


 * 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. If this information isn't verifiable, it shouldn't be merged - some arguments below mention this explictly, but WP:V's non-negotiability makes it implicit anyway. As no source has been presented, and the list has severe problems (notably the lack of black casualties), and would have to be heavily condensed to be encyclopaedic, anything written on casualties in the relevant article would not contravene the GFDL license on the content here. --Sam Blanning(talk) 14:13, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Casualties of Nat Turner's Rebellion
Non-notable victims since they all died, no source, most children victims are Child 1, child 2, child 3.... and some don't have full names anyways Coasttocoast 00:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, This is not information on Nat Turners Rebellion its a Casualty list. And if this was made in rememberance of the lost people its a poor memorial. This should be deleted or the names of the deceased remain unamed.24.243.178.182 04:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Hickman (student)
 * Delete. The rebellion itself might be notable, but the casualties are not. --Alan Au 00:59, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge The rebellion itself is undoubtably notable, the casualty information could be purged and fit into it.  FrozenPurpleCube 01:00, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, no source. If a source is found it can be included in the books section of the rebellion article. Gazpacho 01:13, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: There isn't an article about this rebellion, in Category:Slave rebellions nor otherwise. Barno 01:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * There should be, but Nat Turner will do for now. Gazpacho 08:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge encyclopedic verifiable info. Condense the unnamed schoolkids, of course, but let's not trash this. - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:27, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge a trimmed version into a new article about the rebellion, created by moving parts of the Nat Turner article into a new title such as Nat Turner's Rebellion. Barno 01:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge only if a source is found. I suspect one exists; however, it isn't on the article right now. Crystallina 01:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete what can be merged out of this? Are any of these people notable?  An article about the rebellion would certainly be nice, but this is not what we want to base it on.  Seems like an indiscriminate collection of information to me. -Elmer Clark 01:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: The lead section, at least, seems like it could be useful with a source. Crystallina 01:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect to the rebellion or its namesake. Quite important event in US history; the more detail provided by the parent article, the better. Xoloz 10:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge the names and information are too useful to throw away. 129.98.212.164 19:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, victims not notable, but description of rebellion could be merged into Nat Turner article. Ramsquire 19:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge with Nat Turner or another related article. --Ineffable3000 21:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Prune out repetition, and merge to new article about the rebellion. The source should also be stated, of course, but if we deleted all unsourced articles we'd lose much of the encylopedia's content. Espresso Addict 22:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge (to either Nat Turner or a new article Nat Turner's Rebellion) This article, and its title, to me are too POV to retain. An article about Nat Turner exists.  I agree that we should probably have an article about the incident itself, in addition to that one, if POV is a problem.  But slavery and slave rebellions are too inflammatory, in my opinion, to have a new article for every side of the story.  As the talk page of the article points out, there were non-white victims involved in the incident (and in slavery itself.)  Delicate issues require delicate, consensus-building article discussions and non-POV article titles. And we need sources for these names, as well as some of the details of the article. Dina 03:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per Dina; the omission of black casulties is very troubling. JCScaliger 03:51, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete without smerge either to Nat Turner or prospective Nat Turner's Rebellion (unless sources provided) per WP:NOT (indiscriminate list/memorial). If smerged, names should not be included and additionally "casualties" should be comprehensive per Dina above. Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete The only way this should be merged is if all the victims are included. to be worth including, it needs either a paragraph explaining the 200 plus murdered slaves and the individual names cutting, or the extra paragraph and ALL the names of the black victims. To name only white casualties is on the "we were right to annex the rhineland" side of POV. Boynamedsue


 * Comment I examined the Nat Turner page, and I felt it was too much of a copyvio and reported it. I did start a Nat Turner's Rebellion page from the start though, if anybody wants to edit and improve that.


 * Comment Now that Nat Turner's Rebellion exists it might be a good idea to merge this article just like everyone above stated Coasttocoast 19:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge The nom didn't say whether this has already been tried. It shouldn't have come to an AfD. JASpencer 15:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:V. If the names were sourced with context I'd vote the other way. Arbusto 05:24, 27 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.