Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Mississippi

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 redirect to Mississippi in the American Civil War. Consensus is against deletion. Strongest argument is against a dedicated article for want of sources. czar ⨹ 23:59, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Mississippi

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

This is, at most, an "informal" name. Little to no useful content for merging. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 09:48, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Mississippi in the American Civil War. No sourced content besides the secession document but perhaps a plausible redirect. Deadbeef 09:54, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mississippi-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Secession of Mississippi and purge unsourced stuff. The secession of a US state seems notable, and not really part of what transpired on its territory during the subsequent war. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:16, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Deadbeef. There is nothing substantial in the article but the text of the declaration of secession, which sould be better Transwified to ?Wikisource. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or delete to Mississippi in the American Civil War. The one problem with a redirect is that it leaves dubious Republic of Mississippi links out there based on a "Republic" name lacking reliable secondary sources. The Declaration itself might merit discussion and a page, perhaps as part of an expansion article describing the Mississippi expansion process. However, that article does not exist at present, this existing page has no interpretation of the document, and the declaration can be readily found online. Red Harvest (talk) 07:41, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - per Deadbeef. I agree with CarlosS that Secession of Mississippi would be an encyclopedic article, but all we have here is a primary document, not such an article. Carrite (talk) 15:03, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Mississippi Secession, just as Republic of Louisiana was moved to Louisiana secession back in October. Yes, it will be a stub, but something to build on for what should be a complete series of articles on the succession of the Confederate states. Mojoworker (talk) 03:38, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:22, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Mississippi in the American Civil War. The actual secession of states like MS was rapid, it wasn't holding back like Virginia and North Carolina, I don't believe a separate article on the act of secession would be the best organization of content for readers.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 04:29, 19 December 2014 (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.