Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Operation Flagship

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. Michig (talk) 06:47, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Flagship

[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)

Small-time event that doesn't deserve its own article. It's undersourced and as it has no real room for further expansion anyway, so it could easily just be merged with either the main Washington Redskins article (under the 1980's section) or in the 1985 Washington Redskins season article. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 08:07, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 12:15, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 12:15, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 12:15, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 12:15, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 12:15, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 12:16, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep So I originally thought there was a reasonable amount of coverage from good reliable sources, but alas most are exact duplications of the Washington source (most notably MyAJC and Sydney Herald). Forging the Star is also a good read, but I suspect the official historian of the Marshals is not a fully independent individual. However, The Wrap's article on the topic seems another good source. A look over their site and article has them appearing reasonably reliable, but it's not impossible it misses the mark. Strictly speaking WP:NCRIME/WP:CRIME doesn't apply to the sting but catching 2 out of top 10 gives a good case for importance. The articles/incident expand beyond WP:ROUTINE and while almost nothing meets the literal definition of WP:LASTING if you actually read through its somewhat dramatic language, I think it meets the functioning usage of the term. Nosebagbear (talk) 11:28, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Coverage spanning 1985-2016 - TIME 85UPI (NYT reprint) 85wapo 2015 ESPN short film Strike Team, directed by Willie Ebersol. Some books - [1][2][3][4][5].Icewhiz (talk) 15:19, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- But does this help expand the article, as that's the real issue here. If it's only going to be a paragraph or so in length, then it doesn't deserve to be split out as a separate article, no matter how independently notable it is. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:19, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Several of the sources presented are much longer than the article. ESPN made a short movie about this incident - a 25 minute documentary movie - so clearly there is what to write about if someone has the drive to do this. Prior to the recent bout of coverage, this was also given as an example of a successful marketing campaign (in a non-law enforcement context).Icewhiz (talk) 16:41, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sufficient coverage by sources. Lasting significance. DGG ( talk ) 18:07, 29 July 2018 (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.