Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Czechoslovakia in the Gulf War

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 Keep. (non-admin closure) czar ♔ 07:42, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Czechoslovakia in the Gulf War

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

non-notable intersection, equivalent articles do not exist. Any useful referenced information may be merged to Czechoslovak Army. C 679 12:51, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 15:05, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 15:06, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable topic, passes WP:GNG, per sources: e.g. [1], [2], [3]. No doubt that Czech and Slovakian sources must exist too.--cyclopia ^speak! 16:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovakia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, of course they exist, Cyclopia, see [4] (Czech Television), [5] (Mladá fronta DNES), [6] (Czech Radio) etc etc etc. Jaroslav Kmenta, a notable Czech investigative journalist, focused in his first book "Pouštní horečka" (Desert Fever, 1999) on mysterious diseases of Czech veterans returning from the Gulf War. There is also an (unreferenced) article on the topic at Czech Wikipedia, see Československý protichemický prapor v Perském zálivu 1990-1991. A notable and interesting topic. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 12:26, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – sorry, there is one equivalent article actually. Australian contribution to the 1991 Gulf War exists. But wouldn't any info be best placed at the army page until such time as a separate article is called for by size constraints? C 679 16:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't see any problems with this separate article. It is unreferenced but I would say it is a decent overview. No need to merge. The topic has potential and Wikipedia is a work in progress. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 16:40, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, while I am not finding significant coverage from multiple American English language reliable sources, there are sufficient mentions in multiple reliable sources to show some notability in order to verify sufficient content in order to create an article. Furthermore, showing the Czech language sources found by other editors in this AfD, there are clearly sufficient reliable sources about the subject of this AfD to pass WP:GNG.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:51, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Highly likely to be notable given the sources identified above (it would be nice if the editors who could read them could use them to expand this short article though!) Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Theme is definitely notable Czech language sources. --Jklamo (talk) 02:20, 3 November 2014 (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.