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 Redirect. It was not absolutely clear to me what the redirect target was meant to be. For now I have pointed it to Siege of Constantinople (674–678), but the editors involved certainly could conclude that another target is preferable. Per discussion, no merge was performed. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 18:29, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Syllaeum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

As noted on the article's talk page, the article is misleading because there was no battle at Syllaeum. The Byzantines did indeed attack the besieging Muslims, but they did so in the Sea of Marmara, and no details are known other than the fact that Greek fire won the victory. What happened at Syllaeum was that the retreating Arab fleet was wrecked in a storm. Cf the sources, Theophanes (primary) and Treadgold (secondary). IMO it should be deleted (and its interwiki clones) and the correct events added to the article on the siege itself. Constantine ✍ 23:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename It is not that the naval campaign did not happen, merely that it was not a battle at Syllaeum. There was a battle, followed by the fleet being wrecked at Syllaeum. The article is needed, but the title is inappropriate. I do not know enough of the subject to suggest the right title, but hope some one else can. Peterkingiron (talk) 00:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect. This listing is unnecessary. Simply merging the info and redirecting the article is sufficient. (I wonder where I got the name from? Apparently not Treadgold?) Adam Bishop (talk) 02:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment to explain why I took a rather drastic step of listing it here, instead of simply redirecting it: apparently aided by the WP article, this "Battle of Syllaeum" has proliferated throughout the web. Since there was no battle, and the details of the naval campaign are minimal (IIRC, Theophanes is the main source, and you can see how little he says), keeping the page even as a redirect might be misleading, as it would continue to imply that there was a battle. It is an event that never happened, and as such should not have a page. Regards, Constantine ✍ 06:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IN that case it should be Merge then delete and salt (to prevent re-creation), but where should it be merged to? If to the article in the seige, please indicate what it is called (for the benefit of the closing admin). Peterkingiron (talk) 21:41, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The events the article concerns are part of the Siege of Constantinople (674–678). However the information the article contains on the naval actions is false, so there is nothing to actually merge into the main article. And, is there a proper procedure to notify the other-language Wikis that have got copies of this article? If necessary, I can find my way around the French, Spanish or Italian ones, but not the Bulgarian or Arabic... Regards, Constantine ✍ 22:18, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect (apparently no merge is necessary?). While I understand the reasoning that we shouldn't perpetuate a falsehood, in reality redirects are cheap and rather meaningless from an accuracy standpoint. They are just matters of convenience, and if this term has proliferated around the web, we might as well have a redirect so that people who see the term used somewhere will be able to easily access the correct information on WP. Everyking (talk) 07:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, you do make a good point. Alright, I withdraw the delete proposal. Redirect by me, too. Constantine ✍ 10:08, 27 October 2008 (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.