Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Military Capability

The result of the debate was delete [added by Andre🚐 23:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC) for afdstats]


 * Badly-named list without any context as to how this ranking was determined, what was being measured, and who was measuring it. Move to List of countries by military capability if this can be determined, otherwise delete --Rlandmann 04:31, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep Why didn't you just be bold and just move the page yourself?   Why not try and contact that submitter or raise discussion on the article Talk page?  Refer it to Cleanup? This is a very young article submitted by an IP user. We should be encouraging them rather than biting their first good faith submissions.  -- Netoholic @ 04:57, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Move? Where to?  If it's a list of nations ranked by their military capability, what objective measure was employed?  If the anonymous user got the list from a website, an external link to that website could serve in the article's place, and it would be deleted as a substub anyway.  I'll welcome an article on List of nations ranked by military capability when someone actually takes a serious stab at it.  Delete.  --Ardonik.talk 20:14, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * I left a message on his talk page a few days ago asking to explain how the ranking is determined. It has not been answered yet and I have not been able to find it myself on the Web. If we find out what the criteria for the ranking are, I would keep it. Otherwise, I will have to join the calls to delete. Andris 20:14, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Orphan. Unsourced.  Without sourcing or methodology, there is a high probability that this is original research.  As a bald statement of "military capability", it is intrinsically unverifiable (unless you want to start WWIII).  Further, it is information that will rapidly go stale making this an inherently difficult page to maintain.  I can not foresee how this page can be salvaged but I promise to look at it again at the end of the discussion period.  My vote now is to delete.  By the way, I agree that we should encourage new users but the anon submitter is no longer online.  Judging by his/her other contributions yesterday, this is a somewhat experienced user. Rossami 05:13, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Actually, his edits are fairly novice - see  . -- Netoholic @ 05:17, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: It's just a bunch of country names. Why not move it?  Well, who knows what it is?  It's speculation that this is a list by military capability.  It's a guess that there are any sources for the information.  It would be perpetrating misinformation to move this without verifying everything and writing up encyclopedic content.  Delete: do not retirect, do not move, do not merge. Geogre 13:32, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Without some indication of actually what is being measured, this is no use. Delete. DJ Clayworth 14:14, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Just about the worst article I've ever seen. Delete.--Samuel J. Howard 03:02, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unverifiable, original research.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 21:33, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete. It would be nice to have, if it could be verified, cross referenced with sources, etc. --Jpittman 03:33, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. At best it is a useless and unsubstantiated list, at worst it is just a list of countries. One could do an article on actual military rankings of countries (if that's what this actually is) but this is neither here nor there and having this page in existence is not going to help anybody do that (anymore than it would if it was a list of Lightbulb jokes (country)). --Fastfission 04:49, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. If someone could provide an objective list, it might be nice. Andre 20:06, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)