Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Commanders who never lost a battle


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 00:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Commanders who never lost a battle

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I don't think the existence of this article can be justified, mostly because there is hardly such a thing as 'commanders who never lost a battle'; it is hardly, if at all, ever possible to determine that a commander in fact never lost a single battle. This goes especially for pre-modern commanders, who make up the vast majority of the list, since sources about them are scarce and not all their battles have been recorded. It doesn't seem neutral then to claim that they have never lost a battle. On top of that, the article hardly has any sources backing any of those claims; and as I stated before, in most cases it won't be possible to find the sources necessary to justify them. Therefore, it seems to me that the solution would be to delete the article rather than try to improve it. Also, only 4 other Wikipedia articles link to this one, which I think also says something about its relevance. Lennart97 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  22:19, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  22:19, 14 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete largely unreferenced and has had multiple issues for years.Mztourist (talk) 08:28, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Many of the earlier commanders are unsourced, unverifiable or downright laughable (King Tut, according to his article, probably wasn't even there for the whole two victories credited to him). Maybe a list encompassing the last couple of centuries could be compiled, but this one is useless. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:10, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete due to the multiple issues already detailed above Spiderone  08:28, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete,Per nom., I don't know how we can verify this list. Also there are many names on this list without any references. Alex-h (talk) 10:56, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- Devoke water   (talk)  21:00, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - Very unverifiable and unsourced. This is a very rare subject, and there isn't significant coverage of it. Kori das 📣 22:28, 20 October 2020 (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.