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. The Nordic Goddess Kristen ^{Worship her} 01:03, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijan National Guard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Unreferenced stub. Neither CIA World Fact Book nor Jane's World Armies lists this organisation. No evidence given that it actually exists. Buckshot06(prof) 22:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC) (categories)[reply]

• Delete Keep: Unless someone can provide a source that this is actually real. Ryan4314 (talk) 22:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Buckshot, how do you feel about the article now? Are you happy this organization at least exists? Ryan4314 (talk) 23:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's much better. But should we upmerge it? Buckshot06(prof) 18:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea, wait until the AFD's over and be bold. Trying to contact all these people on a whether or not it should be merged will be a nightmare, besides your merge can always be reverted if someone disagrees. Ryan4314 (talk) 19:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I'd be against a merge. This is a separate entity with a separate identity from the branches of the Azerbaijani military, that is independently notable. We wouldn't merge the US National Guard or the US Army Reserves with the US Armed Forces, and we shouldn't merge this article. --Friejose (talk) 21:01, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I have added a source to show it is real but probably suffers from non-english sources. The fact the article is only a stub and has little content! shouldnt cause its deletion. MilborneOne (talk) 22:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: if it exists, by all means we should keep it, but we need verifiable sources saying so. I saw that particular website last week. The fact remains it is a website of the Special State Protective Service headlined 'Export Oil and Gas Pipelines Security Department,' and refers to the National Guard being active in 1991-92. We cannot keep the article's current text based on that; we'd have to re-write it completely along the lines of 'the AZANG was a reserve unit in 1991-92' or something. We need material backing up that it is the Az reserve today or we have to completely rewrite or upmerge this stub, and if there is no better material provided within 10 days I think that's what we should do. Buckshot06(prof) 23:14, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 15:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep
  Per: Wikipedia:Introduction to deletion process WP:INTROTODELETE: Remember that deletion is a last resort. Deletion nominations rarely improve articles, and deletion should not be used as a way to improve an article, or a reaction to a bad article. It is appropriate for articles which cannot be improved.
  Wikipedia:Potential, not just current state In most cases deletion of an article should be a last resort.
  References are adequate to save article from deletion. travb (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and improve. Deletion seems to be inappropriate here to me, along the lines of what travb and MilborneOne say above. --Friejose (talk) 22:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I added a ref that should eliminate referencing and notability concerns from Heydar Aliyev's presidential library website. Follow the link, and, if you read Russian or use the Google translator function like me, you'll see primary source documentation of the existence and relevance of the ANG. --Friejose (talk) 22:36, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. A part of the Military of Azerbaijan that may be potentially expanded. There's no compelling reason to treat the Azerbaijan National Guard any different than the National Guard of the United States. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:31, 15 January 2009 (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.