Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/U.S. Defense Budget Trends over the past 50 Years: An Annotated Bibliography


 * 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.  Singu larity  02:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

U.S. Defense Budget Trends over the past 50 Years: An Annotated Bibliography

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

An essay / annotated bibliography. While this may be a notable topic, the article is pretty much pure original research / synthesis. Prodded, but author declined. B figura (talk) 04:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as nom, for the reasons above. B figura  (talk) 04:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Military budget of the United States. That is a more encyclopedic coverage of the budget in question. It should not be a simple redirect, since this article seems to contain references and apparently sourced statements about budget growth and "black budget" that are not in the target article. I say "apparently" because the lack of inline refs leaves it up in the air where the essay writer got his facts.Edison (talk) 06:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.   —Nick Dowling (talk) 08:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete It's an essay, and all WP:SYN. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 12:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom, and it's an OR essay. Lawrence Cohen  §  t / e  19:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete or Move to user space. This is simply a personal essay/notes. While it could be used for research in other articles, it's certainly not appropriate for mainspace. Vassyana (talk) 00:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Ros0709 (talk) 09:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as violation of WP:NOR. —TreasuryTag —t —c 09:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: to date, eight similar articles have been created within a short timeframe. There is ongoing discussion about them here. Ros0709 (talk) 09:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as a WP:NOT multiple offender. There's no obligation to keep it around in any form, the author should have known better. WillOakland (talk) 02:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Like the various other "An Annotated Bibliography" essays, these are apparently dumps from a University of Florida course. (cf. "About the author" at the end of this article). -- Fullstop (talk) 19:41, 19 April 2008 (UTC) ps: not likely a multiple offender, but apparently all SPA accounts of students of the same course.
 * Delete this and all the other "annotated bibliography" articles which appear to be dumps from a Florida university KleenupKrew (talk) 10:04, 20 April 2008 (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.