Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Churchill's advocacy of chemical strike against German cities


 * 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   merge to United Kingdom and weapons of mass destruction. or to Chemical warfare#World War II where more applicable  Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:24, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Churchill's advocacy of chemical strike against German cities

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Seems overly specific and redundant to other articles on Churchill. The title's just way too specific, for one. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:57, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 21:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


 * An excellent example of why Churchill employed people to say "no" to him, but as TPH says, unusually specific for an article. Best approach is probably to add a short note to United Kingdom and weapons of mass destruction (along with the 1940 proposals to use gas against an invasion?) and redirect there. Shimgray &#124; talk &#124; 21:07, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Or possibly summarise and redirect to Poison gas? Regardless of which parent article is chosen I don't think it's suitable for a standalone article (per nom). EyeSerene talk 21:17, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - information can if desied be added to the link suggested by EyeSerene, but the title here is, IMHO, an extremely unlikely search term. (In addition, the contribution history of the article's creator suggests it was created as part of a non-neutral POV campaign.) - The Bushranger One ping only 22:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You're right about the title being an unlikely search term. Probably no need to redirect, a deletion would be more logical. I've struck part of my previous comment. EyeSerene talk 09:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination. This was one of Churchill's many 'bright ideas' that were quickly hosed down by the military and have little lasting notability. I agree that summary details should be included in the United Kingdom and weapons of mass destruction article, but this doesn't justify a stand alone article. Nick-D (talk) 10:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Info definitely should be merged somewhere though. Silver  seren C 15:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge — I would strongly suggest merging to Chemical warfare, with a passing mention at Strategic bombing during World War II. The former article covers a range of policy questions and forays by various powers, but does not presently include this Churchill material or Churchill's blunt warning about retaliating against German chemical warfare in 1942, see here. Collectively, this material is almost certainly notable enough for a stand-alone article or two: Chemical warfare policy in World War II or UK chemical weapons policy, breaking out of Chemical warfare and United Kingdom and weapons of mass destruction, but let's leave such expansions for another day.--Carwil (talk) 21:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge into United Kingdom and weapons of mass destruction. POV soapboxing article. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 06:10, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and Merge information as per several above comments. Buckshot06 (talk) 23:10, 15 February 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.