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. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

88 (Arracan) Battery Royal Artillery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Article contains no references to prove notability and is about a company-sized unit PercyPigUK (talk) 13:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United Kingdom. PercyPigUK (talk) 13:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or Merge and Redirect to 4th Regiment Royal Artillery. Given its long history I'd be very surprised if there wasn't information out there. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:40, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:33, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Fails general notability. Based.Kashmiri ^(🗨️) 08:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd be interested in hearing more viewpoints as those editors advocating Deletion are relatively new or inexperienced. Is there more support for a Merge or Redirection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:26, 29 May 2024 (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.