Deletion of Future Korean War

Comment: 1) Full-bodied articles already exist on this topic, but it's not worth a merge because, (2) the title is a POV problem. Other more neutrally-titled articles for this topic include: North Korea–South Korea relations, 2013 North Korean crisis, and Division of Korea. (OPLAN 5027 is a bit too specific). Back to the title POV problem, while the article's contents may be real, the title's spirit is against the of , as it is fundamentally speculative that there will be armed confrontation. And any cultural or notable speculation (the only remaining basis for an independent article) extends as a topic from the current DPRK–SK relations status quo, which is already established with its own article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: The choice of title is unfortunate in light of .  However, this problem could be surmounted by renaming to Proposed scenarios for a future Korean conflict or something similar.  If we look at the article as strictly being about an overview of the published literature describing such scenarios, then it seems to me that the topic would become potentially encyclopedic.  However, I'm not certain if this topic would be best presented in its own article or as a subsection of North Korea crisis.  Being rather unfamiliar with the pertinent details, I'm also not certain about the quality of sources available; aside from OPLAN 5027, does the published literature on this topic consist mainly of journalists stating their opinions, or are there high quality analyses prepared by defense experts
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: Some hypothetical future events receive enough press to be Notable.  This does not necessarily violate : ''As an exception, even highly speculative articles about events that may or may not occur far in the future might be appropriate, where coverage in reliable sources is sufficient.''  There are contingency plans for a war in Korea, which seems reasonably probable at this moment and has at other moments in the last 50 years, and I would like to know what they are and have been.  I'd like to know what people saying about a Korean war, what its impact would be, and what could prevent it.  Wikipedia is an appropriate place for this
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: based on the precedent set by World War Three, a well-written and informative article that doesn't go against . Sure, some of the material in the current version does, but there's no reason it couldn't be brought up to a standard like that of the WW3 article. It's important to distinguish, I think, that this and the WW3 article are not meant to be "what would happen if X and Y went to war" or something as random as "who would win in all-out war, Brazil or Argentina"; that kind of thing doesn't belong here. Both of these conflicts are things that have been researched, with expert opinions to cite, and are situations which could realistically present themselves at some point in the next few years. &nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)