Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zesch's Militia Battery Kansas Light Artillery

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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. Redirects at editor discretion. Spartaz Humbug! 06:01, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zesch's Militia Battery Kansas Light Artillery

[edit]
Zesch's Militia Battery Kansas Light Artillery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This company-sized unit of Artillery existed, and it took part in some battles. That's pretty much the sum of everything I've been able to find out about it. There's no evidence of "significant coverage in reliable, independent sources" as required by the General Notability Guideline. Furthermore, this fails to meet the subject-specific WP:MILUNIT threshold as it was a company-level formation. I'm aware that there are articles about contemporary, similar-sized units but they meet the GNG. If they don't then nominate them too. Exemplo347 (talk) 18:58, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom and the article itself, which states (I kid you not) "Almost nothing is known about this unit." Clarityfiend (talk) 07:01, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I find plenty of coverage of the unit by searching the commander's name, Gustavus Zesch. Also known as Zesch's battery and some reports say sometimes spelled Zisch. FloridaArmy (talk) 14:28, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There's only passing mentions out there - none of the significant coverage in reliable, independent sources that Wikipedia's GNG demands. If I'm wrong, I welcome the addition of sources that meet Wikipedia's standards. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 15:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep For the sake of transparency, I am the article's creator, so my bias is obvious. When the article was created, Wikipedia standards were very restrictive to sources that could be found online. Added to this is the complication of creating an article that includes original research. This article is a prime example of a topic that should be available to folks looking for information and one that should be left intact for others who have information to add (i.e., encouragement to edit or become a new editor). I have done some work also, FloridaArmy, but past extensive edits on other articles I created led to lengthy debates about original research, which I think a lot of folks confuse with opinion rather than scholarship based on actual archival research. Lastly, and I may be greatly mistaken about this, but I think I remember reading that the battery had a mix of white and African American men, which would be a significant contribution to ACW military history if that's true. Spacini (talk) 16:09, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, I look forward to reading this if you manage to find sources that meet Wikipedia's current requirements. Exemplo347 (talk) 16:21, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just an FYI, but that, too, is at AfD...ten times greeting to you this Monday Deb. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap shit room 17:15, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I know, but I will re-phrase - Redirect to Gustavus Zesch if the latter article is retained. Otherwise delete. Deb (talk) 17:20, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect I find plenty of coverage of Zesch's units in the Civil War and I support redirecting to the article about him. An article on a particular company he commanded seems a bit specific. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:36, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kansas-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:13, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:13, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:13, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question how is the research coming on the article and filling it out? It doesn't make sense to delete it if the sources are being dug up and we bring it right back... I'm inclined to go with incubate.--Paul McDonald (talk) 10:49, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Err. So far 72 bytes has been added to it since it was nominated here... —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap shit room 11:50, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      Yeah, the "let's wait for sources" argument doesn't really work at AfD. If the sources can't be found, even by the original author, during the duration of the AfD then they aren't out there. If people want to incubate this (which isn't a valid choice at AfD) then they can copy it to their own user space. No need for red herrings here. Exemplo347 (talk) 13:02, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to 1st Kansas Volunteer Infantry which this seems to be a part of? Or to a higher level Kansas formation, e.g. Kansas State Guard? This short lived 2-gun battery does not pass WP:MILUNIT and does not have SIGCOV. However, it is listed in some orders of battles - e.g. [1].Icewhiz (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • This wasn't part of the 1st Kansas – you may be confusing this with Company I, 1st Kansas, which Zesch commanded. Kges1901 (talk) 22:59, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "Almost nothing is known about this unit" equals no notability. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:22, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to 9th Kansas Militia Infantry Regiment. This is a 2-gun battery (smaller than average) and a militia unit so would have seen less action (as a militia unit these were part time soldiers and so were not assigned to a higher unit). In fact we can only find proof that it fought at Westport; as we have about 3 sentences about the battery itself it makes sense to merge said content into the Kansas unit list 9th Kansas Milita Infantry (if Zesch is not kept). The muster rolls of Zesch's unit are online (pages 29-33), and it included about 90 men though a large number of them went AWOL before Westport. According to a notation on the muster roll, Zesch raised a company of mounted scouts as part of the 9th Kansas Militia Infantry, which mustered in on 10 October 1864, as Price raided Missouri (see Price's Raid for background). They were attached to the post of Fort Leavenworth (which explains Dyer's comments) and were ordered to the front on 20 October, when they were given charge of a light battery (the two guns previously mentioned). After Westport and Price's defeat, the company mustered out on 27 October. Kges1901 (talk) 22:30, 15 May 2018 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zesch%27s_Militia_Battery_Kansas_Light_Artillery&oldid=842096244"