Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mobile infantry


 * 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. L Faraone  01:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Mobile infantry

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

More of an essay than an actual article. Unsourced. Minimal activity since it was created in 2005. Outside of Starship Troopers this isn't a term in common military use in the Western world. Intothatdarkness 21:59, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to something (I'm not really sure what) - the term has been in use since at the latest the '30s (see here) to describe vehicle-borne infantry (motorised/mechanised), but the article really doesn't meet any sort of standards. Ansh666 00:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC) Per Dainomite and Piotrus below, Keep and either create disambiguation page or improve and source content. Ansh666 03:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Then move Mobile Infantry (Starship Troopers) here. The term's not used by the military as far as I can see. An adjective attached to infantry doesn't merit an article. It's even used here to describe upward career mobility. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:05, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Create disambiguation page - Create a disambiguation page that links to Mobile Infantry (Starship Troopers), mechanized infantry and motorised infantry. The news hits show it as a term used around the time of WWII ('30s and '40s) to describe infantry with increased mobility.—  - dain   omite    01:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. I guess a link to the discussion in the German Wikipedia after which their article was deleted - de:Wikipedia:Löschkandidaten/25. Juni 2010 - might be useful... --Martynas Patasius (talk) 01:15, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article is poor quality, but that is not reason for deletion. It is on topic, and the subject, despite nom claim, is widely used in English language, and outside ST context. Here's a book with a section titled "Mobile infantry", about a 1930s German type of a unit, for example: . Here's a source using this in context of Australian army: ; that source also notes it was called mounted infantry in WWI context. in turn draws a parallel to motorized infantry (so, at the very least, this should not be a redirect, but a disambig - still, I feel that both mounted and motorized as subtypes of the main topic which is mobile). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. The "mobile" is just used as an adjective in the first reference. It's like Leg infantry or Elite infantry. The other two references are about mounted and motorized infantry respectively, which have their own articles. There are actual units that have "Motorized", "Mounted" or "Mechanized" in their names, but none that are called "Mobile", except in fiction. This is also not suitable for a dab page. Only one entry is synonymous with the term. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Not actually an English-language term. The references provided by Piotrus above are not in fact focused on "mobile infantry" (the term doesn't even seem to appear), but refer to "mounted infantry" and "motorised infantry", which are distinct concepts in their own right. All infantry are 'mobile' in some way - one of the key features of this branch is that they can cross difficult terrain, and so the mobility of infantry isn't a distinctive concept which can be defined in any coherent way (eg, good examples of infantry mobility include the movements of Roman legions through northern Scotland and the rapid advance of US mechanised infantry in the Iraq War). Nick-D (talk) 10:32, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep The meaning is clear: infantry with enhanced mobility. As this has been done in variety of ways - bicycles, helicopters, horses and motor vehicles - a general page is appropriate to assist readers in navigating to more detailed and specific accounts.  Warden (talk) 12:43, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Question Can you please provide some references which use this term to describe such a generic concept? It's not a commonly-used term in my experience. Nick-D (talk) 00:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment I'd certainly support some sort of disambiguation page, which might be a reasonable idea. But keeping a term that seems to be a wiki-invention makes no real sense to me. You'll also see references to "foot mobile" infantry. Does that mean we should add that, too? And no, "mobile infantry" doesn't seem to me to be the same thing as "infantry with enhanced mobility." Intothatdarkness 13:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - On first blush it seems notable, however Clarityfiend makes a very good argument... it's essentially just an already covered subject with an adjective in front of it. For practical considerations anything new here should be added to the infantry article. It should also be mentioned the article's worthless, it sounds like someone just wrote it off the top of their head. It adds nothing, and having another article placeholder that duplicates what we already have is an invitation for duplicity, needless work, and vandalism. Shadowjams (talk) 04:20, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Term not actually used. Motorised infantry or mechanised infantry, yes; mobile infantry, no. It doesn't even actually mean anything, since all troops are mobile, if only on their feet. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:04, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - the lack of sourcing is its most egregious (sp?) fault. I've had a look, though not extensive, and not found an instance of the phrase "mobile infantry" where the mobile bit is anything other than an adjective ("...more mobile infantry" "mobile infantry square"). Don't see any future in a disambig nor redirect. Heinlein's creation can just sit at "Mobile Infantry". GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:30, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually one instance where it is part of a bigger phrase is "Light Protected Mobile Infantry role" and "Mechanised (Heavy Protected Mobile) Infantry role" in a Parliamentary report, but seems to be a civil service exercise in capitals. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Zip for references...and the term is better explained as mechanized infantry since that is what the article is really trying to explain anyway. Cuprum17 (talk) 13:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - No WP:RS for usage in an actual military context. Seems to be covered over at Mobile Infantry (Starship Troopers).  EricSerge (talk) 17:32, 23 May 2013 (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.