Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Galwan: Difference between revisions

Line 3: Line 3:

:{{la|1=Battle of Galwan}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Galwan|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 October 23#{{anchorencode:Battle of Galwan}}|View log]]</noinclude> | [[Special:Diff/1316944605/cur|edits since nomination]])

:{{la|1=Battle of Galwan}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Galwan|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 October #{{anchorencode:Battle of Galwan}}|View log]]</noinclude> | [[Special:Diff/1316944605/cur|edits since nomination]])

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Battle of Galwan}})

The title “Battle of Galwan” seems made up. A 30-minute conflict where a poorly supplied post got annihilated is hardly worth a Wikipedia page. There are no reliable sources on the topic except for a couple of web stories. [[User:Kautilya3|Kautilya3]] ([[User talk:Kautilya3|talk]]) 20:29, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Line 14: Line 14:

*Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Events|list of Events-related deletion discussions]]. ”'[[User:Wcquidditch|WC”Quidditch”]]”’ [[User talk:Wcquidditch|☎]] [[Special:Contribs/Wcquidditch|✎]] 04:23, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

:<div class=”xfd_relist” style=”margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;”>”'{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}”' Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] [[User talk:Doczilla|”Ohhhhhh, no!”]] 05:06, 23 October 2025 (UTC)<!– from Template:XfD relist –><noinclude>[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|Battle of Galwan]]</noinclude></div>

:<div class=”xfd_relist” style=”margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;”>”'{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}”' ”’Relisting comment:”’ Please use the standard code for airing your argument, Keep, Delete, Redirect, etc., with “Agree” and “Disagree” it’s not always clear how that relates to our standard outcome phrases. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Liz|””’L””’iz]] [[Special:Contributions/Liz|””’Read!””’]] [[User talk:Liz|””’Talk!””’]] 05:46, 30 October 2025 (UTC)<!– from Template:XfD relist –><noinclude>[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|Battle of Galwan]]</noinclude></div>

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The title “Battle of Galwan” seems made up. A 30-minute conflict where a poorly supplied post got annihilated is hardly worth a Wikipedia page. There are no reliable sources on the topic except for a couple of web stories. Kautilya3 (talk) 20:29, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The original page stated the battle took place in “July 1962” which was way before Sino-Indian War and was commanded by “Col. BS Babu” who was born in 1983 and KIA in 2020, which did appear to be made up. Its frivolous and hallucinating nature encouraged me to make the edition,

But I have to

Disagree with the statement that there are no reliable sources on the topic. On the contrary, there are, by both Chinese and Indian side and are generally consistent with each other (surprisingly).

So while I

Agree the page SHOULD BE deleted, I also believe ? Maybe creating a new page of Battle of Aksai Chin which covers all the Chinese offensives (Galwan, DBO, Shyok, Pangong Tso etc.) between 20 to 25 October 1962 in Aksai Chin, can be considered. As collectively, they are definitely worth a page due to its scale. Dan3031949 (talk) 23:56, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Galwan River page already has two sections on the 1962 standoff as well as the 1962 war. Some more details can be added there if necessary. The minute details that are currently being put into this page are not encyclopaedic. Military enthusiasts can write web stories but they cannot go into an encyclopedia. I also don’t see why new pages are necessary when 1962 Sino-Indian War already exists but hasn’t been touched in years! — Kautilya3 (talk) 10:53, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please use the standard code for airing your argument, Keep, Delete, Redirect, etc., with “Agree” and “Disagree” it’s not always clear how that relates to our standard outcome phrases.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:46, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Leave a Comment