Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Las Vegas affair

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 delete. Mergers involving other articles and/or creation of redirects can be pursued as regular editorial matters. RL0919 (talk) 07:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Las Vegas affair

[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)

Apparent WP:HOAX. I checked both the cited sources (both are public domain and accessible on Google Books) and as far as I can tell neither of them mentions a skirmish or battle in Las Vegas, New Mexico. (t · c) buidhe 06:14, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~Comment I doubt it's a hoax based on mentions in at least 4 published books [1][2][3][4]. Unsure as to notability at this time so retracting my !vote. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe not a hoax but I don't think these show notability as 1, 3 and 4 appear to be passing mentions and 2 is a primary source account. (t · c) buidhe 14:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:EVENTCRIT. Absolutely zero information on this supposed battle on search engines. KidAd • SPEAK 19:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit and/or Merge Not so much a hoax as ill-conceived. Commonly known as the Fight at Las Vegas and, as listed by the U.S. military, the Battle of Las Vegas, which took place June 20, 1847 (https://books.google.com/books?id=NzafDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA199 (also noted: June 6 https://books.google.com/books?id=-bULAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA143 and July 7, 1847, according to some sources, but it seems a potential skirmish was avoided that day https://archive.org/details/notesofmexicanwa00oswa/page/204). It was the oddly chosen title and "July 1847" that had immediately caught my eye as being off in this article, which I'd picked off from a long list of potentially compromised articles created by one editor, first found confabulating an article by Keith H99. There may be enough to edit into a viable article, but likely a small addition to the war's article is more suitable. I hadn't had time to dig deeper as yet, so had not suggested a deletion. Rather than delete, the facts may possibly be merged into another article, if there's not enough to warrant a stand-alone page. It is mentioned in the Las Vegas, New Mexico article, without a WP:RS Lindenfall (talk) 20:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge it into Taos_Revolt#Further_fighting, seems reliably sourced but not notable enough for a standalone article. --Nug (talk) 21:33, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Possibly, an excellent idea from Nug (above). However, the Taos Revolt article, together with all three of the otherwise unsourced battle articles linked in that Further fighting section, should first be examined and, likely, reduced to one single article, as the same editor created all four. That editor is Az81964444 outed as a noted fabulist by @Keith H99:, then outed and banned as sockpuppet $1LENCE D00600D. (See notes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Action_of_13_December_1814 and more articles that need checking, editing and/or merging: https://xtools.wmflabs.org/pages/en.wikipedia.org/Az81964444.) Lindenfall (talk) 20:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Taos Revolt has a separate section in The Encyclopedia of the Mexican-American War, so I think that article is okay. Merging all three of the battle sub articles (Battle of Red River Canyon, the Battle of Las Vegas, and the Battle of Cienega Creek) into Taos Revolt is a good idea as all three don't seem notable enough for standalone articles. --Nug (talk) 23:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not seeing (1) what sources call it "Las Vegas affair" and (2) what there is sourced to merge. Better to delete this title and redirect Battle of Las Vegas to Taos Revolt#Further fighting as suggested, adding the above sources. czar 00:38, 18 January 2022 (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.