Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Modèle 1978 helmet

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. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 01:51, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Modèle 1978 helmet

[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)

Article does not give third-party source and none can be found. Possible failure of general notability guidelines. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As we have articles on pretty much every other helmet ever worn (see Category:Combat helmets), I fail to see why this one should be non-notable. Military equipment of major countries is most certainly notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:04, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Necrothesp, well I only found hits to other Wikis, so no notable third-party sources. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This helmet is part of an evolution of military protective gear. It was the French Army's standard issue for over 10 years and was the last steel helmet before the introduction of fiber helmets. Unfortunately no book has yet been written on the dialectical evolution of helmets in response to shrapnel and small arms fire. When one is, this helmet will be part of the story, paralleling similar evolution in US military gear, amongst others.Acad Ronin (talk) 01:26, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So you saying it should be kept despite having no source? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 13:07, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - it still needs sourcing... Ingratis (talk) 02:10, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ingratis, I tried looking for one but only found hits to other Wikis. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 11:54, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tyw7: - I understand! I was agreeing (clumsily) with your point. Ingratis (talk) 12:39, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: this article is certainly weak source-wise, but the subject is clearly notable, and what is stated in the article is not controversial. Wikipedia has rules for certain reasons, and sticking to the letter of the rule irrespective of their spirit is not constructive. And in any case, unsourced or weakly sourced articles should be marked as such or preferably improved, not deleted. Deletion is for unencyclopedic material. Rama (talk) 07:28, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rama, if there's not enough sources, perhaps it should be merged to another article. Perhaps a super document for all the hemets. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 11:54, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Modèle 1978 has the same sort of references as many other articles on similar subjects on en:, and exists in three languages. I you think that helmet models do not warrant their own articles except for the most famous, you should start a general conversation on the subject, not single out a specific instance. Rama (talk) 09:03, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, hundreds of thousands of soldiers have worn this on their head. It has to be notable! Vici Vidi (talk) 05:27, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Vici Vidi, so just because tons of people use it, it has to be notable, even without references? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 08:06, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 08:06, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, If there's a lack of sources, find some! I literally just spent less than 5 minutes looking, and came across these: 1)http://www.nyc-techwriters.com/militaria/french_helmets2.htm 2)http://msgrenot.free.fr/modele_1978.htm 3)https://www.world-war-helmets.com/fiche/https:/www.world-war-helmets.com/fiche.php?q=Casque-Francais-Mle-F1-serie-1 SmartyPants22 (talk) 15:23, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SmartyPants22, I did and only found hits to other Wiki sites! --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 20:51, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good argument and some other keep votes also aren't very convincing, the fact is that during this AfD, some editors have added quite a bit of sourcing to the article. The article now cites 3 books, and though I don't have the books and cannot really evaluate the depth of coverage, it seems to me that the subject passes the GNG. PJvanMill (talk) 15:53, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but WP:COMMONSENSE. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:05, 23 June 2020 (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.