Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Defense of Rorke's Drift hospital

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was No Consensus. Redwolf24 05:15, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Defense of Rorke's Drift hospital
This not an implicit vote for deletiion, but my remedy for the procedurally defective nomination of a page whose deletion i will oppose below. (User:GJeffery placed the VfD tag 22:56, 2005 August 13.) --Jerzy·t 00:49, 2005 August 15 (UTC)


 * Keep & send to cleanup (or Merge as (sub-,sub-sub-, etc.) section in Rorke's Drift & probably keep rdr). I suppose this VfD is my fault, for not extending the distraction the article represented long enuf to put that article on cleanup myself. As careful consideration should make clear, the content belongs in a single non-bio article, which is the purpose that i created the article for. The event the title names involved equally Pte. (not Pvt., i gather, in His Majesty's terminology) Robert Jones and Pte. William Jones, who each received the Victoria Cross in citations that IIRC differ from each other only by the switching of the positions of the names. Each pte. still has a bio stub (They are known to have separate lives: IIRC, one was a suicide, one's medal was sold to a toff, each married, whatever.), left after the bulk of each of the VC-site bios (essentially common to both) was reduced to a lk to this new article. WP is not a hagiographic work (in contrast to the site from which these bios were "migrated"), so it is neither necessary nor remotely acceptable here to retell a heroic deed jointly performed by the two or fifty who were equally decorated for it, two or fifty times in their respective WP bios. "Contents moved [sic] to Robert Jones (VC)" (presumably meaning either "copied to" or  "... to be moved, immediately prior to deletion, ...") would in any case be a mistake, for they would also be needed  in William Jones (VC) (unless i failed to insert the lk in place of them, as i intended and described above). --Jerzy·t 00:49, 2005 August 15 (UTC)
 * I don't mean to be mean or anything, but I don't understand a single sentence of the above Apollo58 06:06, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Truly unnecessarily convoluted explanation. All I can make out is criticism to migrated Victoria Cross articles. As for me, I would vote to merge to Rorke's Drift - that article would also do with lots of expansion - Skysmith 11:55, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The only response called for is this off-topic one for the record; it is necessary only bcz "criticism" (such a loaded word) has been attributed to me. My only "criticism" of the valuable VC articles is that they are well suited to their source but not yet to WP; they have suffered neglect. That is not a complaint about their authors: WP may need to consciously seek balance by compensating for ignorance of military affairs, as it has been argued WP should compensate for ignorance of 6 of the 7 continents. --Jerzy•t 15:34, 2005 August 18 (UTC)
 * The effort made toward comprehension is clearly adequate to this uncontroversial nom. --Jerzy•t 15:34, 2005 August 18 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.