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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:15, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Yultong Bridge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

The page from the Tagalog Wikipedia tl:Labanan sa Tulay ng Yultong reads: "04:04, 15 Disyembre 2008 Bluemask (Usapan | ambag) nabura ang "Labanan sa Tulay ng Yultong" ‎ (nilalaman ay: original research/hoax)". Article is unsourced, non-verifiable, reads like a diary entry which is non-encyclopedic. Dubious content. Contains a copyvio from http://www.timawa.net/forum/index.php?topic=22488.0 (note that this is an internet forum, and not a valid source). -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 04:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, but bust down to a stub. Regarding the copyvio concern, at least, the phrasing in the Wikipedia article antedates that forum post, so copyvio isn't a problem. As for the event itself ... at some point in the past, this article was moved from Battle of Yultong to its current title. The original name, however, is somewhat more productive for sources. That said, there's not a lot of them -- primarily specialist works on military history, published in the Philippines and not available online. Regardless, there's some indication that the battle was considered locally significant in the Philippines, and the unit involved was among the foreign units given the US Army Distinguished Unit Citation during the Korean War (for actions immediately following this battle, however). Bottom line, though, the event is verifiable and not a hoax, although the current text very likely needs to be stubbified again until someone can track down potential sources (in particular: Philippine Campaigns by Uldarico Baclagon, published by Graphic House in 1958; and Military History of the Philippines, also by Baclagon, published 1975 by Saint Mary's Publishing). Serpent's Choice (talk) 04:40, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The article, as written, clearly does not meet Wikipedia standards. The primary problem is lack of references. Yet the topic is an important one, and the event has historical significance. A web search on the topic yields lots and lots of hits. This article has a great deal of potential, if someone took the time to fix it. Ebikeguy (talk) 04:43, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but delete everything except the lead. The content suspected of being a copyvio probably is a copyvio, but not from the forum that the nominator identifies. The forum post is dated July 19, 2010, but versions of this article from before that date still include the text in question. The battle appears to be notable, but the article needs to be written with sourced information. SnottyWong ^confess 13:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Isn't Captain Yap (mentioned and redlinked in the article, but not expanded) also the first Phillipino to receive their Medal of Valour for Korea? This is a well-recorded battle in Korean War histories, very well known amongst Phillipinos. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- Marcus Qwertyus 17:29, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. -- Marcus Qwertyus 17:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: the concerns can be easily cleaned up and fixed without deletion. bahamut0013^words_deeds 17:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Article incubator?, Unlikely to be worked on but if someone can cite the force numbers I'd change my vote. Marcus Qwertyus 19:22, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all copyright violations (revision-deletion can be used after removal, if the article is not a copyright infringement in its entirety), keep whatever is left (if anything). Peter Karlsen (talk) 02:16, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you claim is a copyvio? The allegation is being thrown around, but no-one is pointing out just what, and from where. The nom also appears to have withdrawn some of their accusation. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:27, 28 October 2010 (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.