Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States Air Force bombardment groups assigned to Strategic Air Command


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

List of United States Air Force bombardment groups assigned to Strategic Air Command

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is an old article created by a contributor when wikipedia was in a much less developed state. It lists (inaccurately) the ten first bomb groups of Strategic Air Command. Since it was created, well-referenced articles have been created for all the groups in question. At the main article, Strategic Air Command, there is now a well-referenced in-text list of the groups in question sourced to a reputable historical work. Thus this article is no longer necessary, and it is not an obvious search target, which is why I have not considered reducing it solely to a redirect. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support.--Reedmalloy (talk) 14:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support per Buckshot06. W. B. Wilson (talk) 16:18, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  DGG ( talk ) 22:42, 6 March 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete—Buckshot's reasoning is sound, the article is redundant to content already (properly) placed in other articles. Liv it ⇑ Eh?/What? 03:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Neutral - Needs to be renamed List of 1946 Strategic Air Command Bombardment Groups] and rewritten, although probably could be deleted and a sub-category made of the individual unit pages created instead.  The first 10 SAC bombardment groups in 1946 already have that historical honor noted in their introductions on their unit pages already. Bwmoll3 (talk) 03:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Leaning delete If this has been wrong since it was started, never fixed and is covered elsewhere, then we may as well delete this per the essay WP:TNT. I note that the SAC article links to several other lists in similar states of disrepair. Nick-D (talk) 09:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete on the grounds that a better treatment of the content exists in another article. GraemeLeggett (talk) 22:25, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete SAC inactivated all its groups in June 1952 (they had been paper units since February 1951) and the groups at Andrews AFB in 1947-1948 were also paper units, even if all eligible groups were included, it would be a short list, and many of the groups would not be notable for their time with SAC. Lineagegeek (talk) 00:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Very narrow cross-section that's not of much encyclopaedic value and would appear to be so specific that it's not really a viable list. I'd say merge, but if there are factual errors and the content is already adequately covered in potential target articles, there'd be little point in that, and it's such a specific title that it's unlikely to be of much use as a redirect. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?


 * Delete. The factual errors, the over-specialised usage, and overlap with alternative lists that do this job better already makes this a poor addition; nothing will be lost if it is just dissolved completely. Kyteto (talk) 13:19, 9 March 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.