Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Military career of Julius Caesar


 * 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   redirect to Military campaigns of Julius Caesar. Anything not al ready there can be merged from the history if it is sourced.  Sandstein  05:26, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Military career of Julius Caesar

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article simply replicates information on Military campaigns of Julius Caesar - merge been proposed since Sep 2010 but frankly this page is unnecessary and has no references to support claims such as 'Historians place the generalship of Julius Caesar (100 BC-44 BC) on the level of such geniuses as Alexander the Great, Hannibal, Khalid ibn al-Walid, Genghis Khan and Napoleon Bonaparte'. Reichsfürst (talk) 11:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC) Reichsfürst (talk) 11:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Is this article a spin off article of the main Julius Caesar article that was not properly tagged? Or is this article an unnecessary content fork from the main? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Why didn't you just redirect it to the campaign article? That's quick and easy. 65.94.47.63 (talk) 05:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Unnecessary content fork. And a merge discussion was started a while ago but nothing happened and frankly leaving this is going to confuse those who should be on Military campaigns of Julius Caesar so yeah a redirect would be good. Reichsfürst (talk) 11:47, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge & Redirect Two other editors have suggested a redirect to Military campaigns of Julius Caesar, and that would be good. Furthermore, I am of the opinion anything not already within that article that is well referenced to reliable sources, should be merged into it. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:59, 28 June 2011 (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.