Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pushups as fitness levels in the US military


 * 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. violet/riga (t) 09:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Pushups as fitness levels in the US military

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is only a list of statistics. Any necessary information can be found on U.S. Army and push up. Captain  panda  12:48, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Anything but merge to press up. Until about 10 minutes ago, this information was part of press up. However, it is indeed rather specific data that was somewhat dominating the press up article, so I split it out. I wouldn't have any huge objections if we want to delete it outright, but it would be better if we didn't merge it back in. &mdash; Matt Crypto 13:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep 'Round here, we call 'em "pushups" not "press ups", so don't worry about a merger.  Keep, because it's an article about a measure of fitness as defined by an official entity that requires its employees to meet standards of physical witness.  It would be interesting to see what the levels are in the armed services elsewhere in the world Mandsford 14:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Looks like the articles creator doesnt want it. Also looks like worthless trivia.  Marcus22 15:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is currently not more than just some statistics and numbers. I believe this article should be deleted on the basis that wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Icestorm815 18:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There's no need of this kind of detail in a Wikipedia article - this isn't a manual of physical fitness - it's an encyclopedia. A discussion of general military fitness requirements or training might make more sense. MarkBul 19:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per MarkBul. This also very clearly violates WP:NOT. Van Tucky  Talk 22:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep how are you meant to tell readers how fit someone is, we could write in an article something like "US service men have to be fit" which could mean anything, awkward as it seems this article gives us a context for such a statement, fitness being something we can only relate here indirectly. Although WP:NOT, it would be something akin to writing Babe Ruth was a great baseball player, which could be someones opinion but with the stats section at the end of that article that statement is qualified.KTo288 22:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * In the example of Babe Ruth, the statement that he was great would require the use of stats. However, in the article of Babe Ruth, the statistics does not outweigh the amount of text. It should also be noted that Babe Ruth is not a FA, possibly because there may be too much stats listed in the article itself. It would be much more benificial if you use the sources where you got the stats and use them as refrences for articles like fitness (As should the Babe Ruth article). Icestorm815 00:09, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment this is not really the place to discuss this, but its not unknown for encyclopedias and articles to have appendixes, tables and stats that illustrate ideas in the article, but which detract from the trajectory of ideas in the article. Having these stats and tables as part of the wikiproject itself rather than as external sources, allows these sources to be easily available to multiple articles and eases navigation. KTo288 23:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, Wikipedia is not a services reference and not the place for minutae about fitness requirements etc. Nuttah68 10:00, 16 September 2007 (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.