Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Commando Selection Training Course

Commando Selection Training Course

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

Subject lacks "significant coverage" in reliable sources and is therefore not notable per WP:GNG. Whilst some SF selection cses have attracted quite a bit of coverage, such as that for the SAS / SASR etc, the Commando Selection Training Course has not. The only sources that seem to be available are the Defence Force Recruiting website which is hardly significant nor is it independent. What information exists can be covered elsewhere such as at 2nd Commando Regiment (Australia) etc. Anotherclown (talk) 10:46, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Anotherclown (talk) 10:46, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:49, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, there is an Australian documentary series (Commando 2013) dedicated in a large part to this process. This Documentary has also been on the Qantas in-flight Documentary library for the past 10 months and has prompted a large spike in interest. This has been communicated by ADF recruitment, through which I work, with continuous requests for copies of the documentary and additional information regarding the Selection process outlined. Accuracychaser (talk) 06:56, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Qantas in-flight video and a recruiting website are not evidence of "significant coverage" which is what is required. As far as I can tell the subject has only received passing mention in a few books and articles, but never in the detail needed to support a stand alone article. Wikipedia isn't here to regurgitate the DFR website - those interested in joining can find the information there. The make up of the course seems to change fairly frequently anyway and will probably be called something else next week... Pls prove me wrong though - provide the details of the independent sources which cover this course in detail and I will withdraw this nomination. I have no agenda I just don't think it is currently covered sufficiently in reliable sources to be notable. This may of course change over time but at the moment there is nothing that I can find. Anotherclown (talk) 11:33, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I can find some coverage of the article in a section, but not like other article's sections, if we can keep this article, we can add references and fix the sections up for a minute or two. However, I find this article broken up so much that we might need a complete rewrite. It's more like an application form instead of an encyclopaedia article. DSCrowned^(talk) 12:18, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. This is a run of the mill special forces selection process. The claim that the course is "one of the toughest military courses in the world" is almost certainly rubbish - there is no way that the Australian Army could man two commando battalions and the SAS Regiment from its relatively small pool of infantry if it insisted on them being among the best soldiers anywhere (and the Australian SAS course is, of course, tougher anyway - and even there candidates are apparently provided with more assistance than is the case for the British SAS course, for presumably the same reason) Nick-D (talk) 00:51, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]