Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battles of macrohistorical importance involving invasions of Europe (2nd nomination)
in some capacity per  and  as at worst the article undeniably has cited material that can be merged to articles on the individual battles or a new article on "decisive battles".  One might also say to keep per  as the article is just plain interesting and these sorts of fun and interesting articles are big reason why so many people come to Wikipedia in the first place.  Moreover, the idea that encyclopedias do not include essays is bunk.  Look at any of the book of the year updates for ''Britannica'' to see many thesis-driven essays based on so-called primary sources.  Finally, the article serves a navigational function akin to a table of contents by listing these battles and providing readers with quick links to their respective articles.  And as a list the article is clearly discriminate: only battles, only battles of macrohistoircal importance, only battles of macrohistorical importance involving invasions, and only battles of macrohistorical importance involving invasions of Europe.  There is therefore absolutely zero pressing need to redlink this article, whereas by contrast we could unquestionably salvage some of its contents for use elsewhere and we never delete when that is the case per .  Sincerely
— User:A, 13:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BEFORE||WP:PRESERVE||WP:IAR||WP:PRESERVE (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion)