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. No reason to delete here... Tone 17:13, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of largest empires[edit]

List of largest empires (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

subject to vandalism 3^0$0%0 1@!k (0#1®!%$ 13:55, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Keep Subject to vandalism is not a valid criteria for deletion. All of our articles are subject to vandalism and many have been vandalized to a much greater extent than this article. L0b0t (talk) 14:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep per L0b0t. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:09, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep An article that is subject to vandalism does not make it warrented to delete. Page protection maybe... Further if the intention is to merge the article then that discussion belongs there on the page where it has already begun. The grounds for deletion of this article are not established. It is notable and well sourced. I am concerned over the purpose of this nomination and if a valid reason isnt supplied by the nominater i think the discussion should be closedOttawa4ever (talk) 14:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*delete, aside from POV/missing soureces/vandalism issues the article is mostly redundant to the the clearly superior and appropriately sourced list of largest empires--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)--Kmhkmh (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the deletion discussion here is on the article List of largest empires which does have citations and references. Are you sure your votiing delete? Ottawa4ever (talk) 15:41, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noting me, i hate the AFD structure and the template was linking to nowhere, the one i wanted to suggest was for deletion was List of major empires instead. The [list of largest empires]] has a imho a POv-problem with some IP editors as well, but the overall article is well sourced and one misbehaving editor does not justify the deletion of the article.--Kmhkmh (talk) 16:00, 26 September 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.