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 merge to 3rd Rhode Island Heavy Artillery. MBisanz ^talk 03:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battery A, 3rd Rhode Island Heavy Artillery

[edit]

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

Fails WP:MILUNIT, which specifically states that batteries are not notable.. Every one of these battery articles is a copy of the same material about the 3rd Heavy Artillery Regiment (next command level up) recopied from the same sources with the company letter changed. Therefore, I will be nominating all 12 companies for deletion under the same rationale. They should not be redirected to 3rd Rhode Island Heavy Artillery because they're not mentioned independently there, and they're not even mentioned independently in their own articles. MSJapan (talk) 06:02, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Rhode Island-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This info ought to be described in the article about the regiment, which is facing deletion, too. Chris Troutman (talk) 07:38, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Individual company-sized units are not generally notable, especially not those that are organic to a larger unit. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:48, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- non-notable sub-units. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:17, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: not independently notable, although the individual batteries should be covered in the parent article on the regiment itself if that article is kept. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 13:59, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: content covered in these articles should not be lost and could easily be preserved in the article 3rd Rhode Island Heavy Artillery, although doing so may present some formatting issues for ACW articles that list battles or other actions in which a military unit participated. Each battery of the regiment had different assignments (brigade, division, corps, etc.) during the ACW, so resolving that may be complicated or it could simply be part of the section in which the individual battery is described. Spacini (talk) 15:55, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - I think artillery batteries in the US Civil War were often land forces "capable of undertaking significant, or independent, military operations", so I don't think that MILUNIT automatically applies, but I'm not sure. I don't see much in these articles that shows this applies to these batteries. In any case, I would like to see citations specific to a battery beyond Dyer's compendium to really establish notability. If someone (Spacini?) would expand any such articles to establish notability, including citations (preferably inline), that would be better than deleting all of these (and numerous other weak articles on Civil War Units). Smmurphy^(Talk) 18:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Some statements in the deletion nomination are not exactly correct. They are not exact copies of each other. Each of the batteries has a separate unit history within Dyer's compendium source, which, for Rhode Island, seems to be an uncredited copy of the official 1865 report by the R.I. Adjutant General. Here in browsing format is beginning of Rhode Island's 41 units' histories. There is a lot of overlap but also there is different information available about each unit (reflected in their articles), as they started and ended at different times and sometimes went to different battles. --do ncr am 23:51, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge (to the 3rd Rhode Island Heavy Artillery article). A separate short paragraph or mini-section can/should be given for each battery, giving when/where they were formed and mustered out, and commenting briefly what they did differently from the main body of the regiment. E.g. note that one battery was the only one detached to go to Texas or wherever and participating in whichever battle or campaign. --do ncr am 23:51, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all to 3rd Rhode Island Heavy Artillery. Not individually notable per WP:MILUNIT and WP:GNG; however, the regiment is in my opinion. Anotherclown (talk) 00:39, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all relevant, unduplicated content in all of the articles under consideration here to 3rd Rhode Island Heavy Artillery in order to preserve such useful & encyclopedic information. Guy1890 (talk) 21:22, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.