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 moved to draft. Now at Draft:Second Phase Campaign (Korean War). ansh 666 17:09, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Second Phase Campaign (Korean War)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

There isn't a need for this barely-edited standalone article, the information is already contained already be found in the relevant Korean War articles (See this, this and this) and the material that's currently there is unimportant, unsourced and controversial. I suggest turning this article into a disambiguation page which refers to the Chongchon and Chosin Reservoir battles. Wingwraith (talk) 00:22, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article was created as a stub and with a slightly different title in 2009. Today I proposed to expand the article and duly tagged it as under-construction, but so far have only revised the summary paragraph.

The sudden desire of User:Wingwraith to delete the article is curious, especially as he has just been deleting referenced material I inserted in the article titled Battle of Chosin Reservoir. During our discussion of those edits, User:Wingwraith has referred to my edits as "fascist," and "hysterical."

I refer to the above only to suggest to other editors that User:Wingwraith's motives in proposing that this article be deleted may not be driven by his desire to improve Wikipedia.

User:Wingwraith cites cite three articles that he says already contain the information that would be included in Second Phase Campaign (Korean War). The first article he cited, the Korean War article, is general and has little detail about specific campaigns and battles. The part of the Korean War article related to the Second Phase Offensive is only fifteen lines long. The articles Battle of Chosin Reservoir and Battle of Ch'ongch'on River are about specific battles carried out during the Second Phase Offensive. There is some information about Chinese strategy, objectives, military capabilities, etc. included in these articles, but about 90 percent of each of these articles is focused on the U.S. forces and actions. Thus, it seems a clear and present need for a wikipedia article which contains more complete and relevant information about a Chinese military campaign which defeated the UN/US forces in North Korea and forced them to retreat and withdraw from South Korea. Lacking at present in Wikipedia is detail about Chinese decision making in launching the Second Phase Offensive, strategy, tactics, and weapons of the Chinese army, and the consequences of those battles on Chinese forces and strategy for pursuing the war. That is the subject matter of the article User:Wingwraith proposes for deletion.

There is a growing body of scholarly work in English about the Chinese participation in the Korean War. That material would be tapped for this article. My editing and expansion of this article would be for the purpose of broadening a reader's knowledge of the Korean War beyond the U.S-centric focus of current wikipedia articles about the Second Phase Campaign. It was no small campaign, by the way, involving about 350,000 soldiers on both the Chinese and the UN/US sides.Smallchief (talk)

1) There's nothing curious about my proposal to delete this article. It's something that anybody can do and I came upon this article organically ever since my engagement with you on the the Chosin Reservoir talk page. In any case it's no less curious then your sudden interest in this article after it was left untouched for over a year. Do not try to make it out like I am hounding you.

2) My description of your edits on that page was based on the facts of what you wrote whereas your assertion that my proposal is not driven by my desire to improve Wikipedia is a violation of WP:AGF which will be further noted should that need arise.

3) We can integrate all the material that you've referred to into the other articles. What is this article going to tell us that we can't already find in the other three? Both of articles whose topics are about the two battles that the campaign mainly comprised of (Ch'ongch'on River and Chosin Reservoir) are listed as good warfare articles so that's even more of a reason to integrate your sources there first. Also, it doesn't make sense to discuss strategy, tactics, weapons, etc on an article like this which should be about generalities and not specificities, if you do that you will start to make whole sections in the two other articles redundant. You'll also note that there's no standalone article for the First, Third and Fourth Phase Campaign so you will need to explain why this campaign in particular deserves a standalone article.

4) "My editing and expansion of this article would be for the purpose of broadening a reader's knowledge of the Korean War" Do not make yourself out to be an impartial editor on this matter when your contributions on the Chosin Reservoir articles prove that you are editing from a pro-PVA perspective.

Wingwraith (talk) 03:17, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 07:58, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 07:58, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Move to draft. Poor spinoff of Korean War - content in main article is more developed. I'll note that this is a notable topic, and could be developed standalone - but at the present state there is nothing to salvage here that isn't the main article. Should this article be developed, it should be named Second phase offensive which seems to be, by far, the COMMONNAME.Icewhiz (talk) 12:22, 1 July 2018 (UTC) If we have an editor willing to work on this - it is notable standalone.Icewhiz (talk) 12:36, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article is under construction and is so tagged. It has existed as a stub since 2009, and only yesterday did I begin to add material to elevate it from stub category. Please note the underconstruction tag at the head of the article. As the article has existed as a stub without challenge to its notability since 2009, some time should be allowed for it to be developed beyond a stub.

I am perfectly happy with the name Second phase offensive as an alternative to Second Phase Campaign.

One problem is that there is no "main article." There are two articles about separate battles in the Second Phase Campaign or Offensive: Battle of Chosin Reservoir and Battle of Ch'ongch'on. These two battles were one operation in the Chinese mind. An overview article is desirable which goes into more detail about the Chinese preparation and carrying out of the offensive -- and the decision making process of US commanders and intelligence officers that led the UN forces to advance into the teeth of a major Chinese attack. The failures of imagination and Intelligence on the part of the U.S. in Korea are similar in many ways to the failures in the Tet Offensive during the Vietnam War. The Second Phase Offensive in Korea and Tet in Vietnam had similar outcomes -- they caused a loss of confidence by the American people and leaders that the Korean and Vietnam wars could be won.

There is precedent for an article about the Second phase offensive. The follow-on Fifth phase offensive has a Wikipedia article in good standing titled Chinese Spring Offensive. Perhaps the First, Third, and Fourth phase offensives also deserve articles. In any case, the Second phase offensive was, I believe, the most politically and militarily decisive of the five Chinese offensives. In other words, it is highly notable.Smallchief (talk) 20:39, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have created 127 articles, none of them stubs, in my eight years as a Wikipedia editor. I've never had an article deleted (although I had one transferred to User space because it was an essay rather than an article). Bear with me. I'm building an article that was a nothing-stub when I began working on it yesterday. Smallchief (talk) 20:48, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Smallchief: Modified my !vote to move to draft (and if you brush this up enough in the coming week - I'll change my vote to keep). My concern is at the present state of the article - I agree the topic is notable standalone.Icewhiz (talk) 12:36, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Icewhiz: Agreed. Now, if I can figure out how to move it.....Smallchief (talk) 13:17, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can't make heads or tails out of the instructions on how to move an article to draft space. I'll request help. Smallchief (talk) 15:57, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to draftspace. Can this discussion be closed now? So the inappropriate template can be removed. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 16:24, 2 July 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.