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 to Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. by consensus DGG ( talk ) 19:09, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict

[edit]

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

This is an opinion piece (WP:SOAP). The topic of the protection of cultural property in war is notable, but the place to do so would be in the article cultural property itself. Sandstein 15:05, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:11, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete: The content is a bit essayish and hence has neutrality problems. In principle, the subject may well be notable enough for a standalone article, but I'd want to see almost completely new content and probably a different title too, so the best option here is to delete without prejudice to future creation with improvements... bobrayner (talk) 18:00, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, with no prejudice against later re-creation. This might well be an encyclopedic topic, but the current article is not. MKFI (talk) 07:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per MKFI, but if ever recreated should have a new, more encylopedic title. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. Obvious. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 13:24, 16 September 2011 (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.