Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greatest Military Leaders

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. WP:SNOW, effectively a personal essay in list form. postdlf (talk) 16:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Military Leaders

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

I feel that this article is necessarily original research because "greatest" is a personal opinion. Therefore, there is no objective way to state "this is what an article with this title is about". Alternatively, an appropriate, well-defined title to which this could be moved would be welcome, but I can't think of one. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:45, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:35, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:35, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:35, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I think this page would go against the WP:NPOV. The page would turn into an argument than an article with Example being the greatest military leader. --Rent A Troop (talk) 09:10, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is an unfinished stub which has no chance whatsoever of not being classed as both POV and original research in its current form. A "List of Military Leaders" might be more appropriate but would easily become unmanageably long, hence why existing military leadership lists seem to be by country or series of conflicts. Dtellett (talk) 11:54, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

delete A Cracked article, not an encyclopedia article. Mangoe (talk) 12:45, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It would be pretty much impossible to have an article on this topic, and this iteration is one editor's opinion Nick-D (talk) 07:04, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it's a subject that is occasionally covered in books - but those are all opinion. And this one is just one editor's opinion. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:39, 18 March 2015 (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.