Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jat clans of Multan Division: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:41, 3 March 2014

Jat clans of Multan Division

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

What is the point of this, bearing in mind that the lead says "The appearance of a particular tribe as Jat in the list does not in itself confirm that the tribe is Jat or otherwise. Identity may change with time, and some groups in the list may no longer identify themselves as Jats." Also bear in mind that the 1911 census was not reliable, being subject to the huge misunderstandings resultant from the influence of H. H. Risley and other scientific racists. It's basically just a transcription of a primary source. Sitush (talk) 01:43, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is a harmless list and we have plenty of lists on ethnic groups. As far as I can see, there is no policy-based reason for this deletion nomination. Mar4d (talk) 12:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eh? WP:RS, for starters. WP:OSE also. - Sitush (talk) 13:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Agreed with Mar4d, no policy based reason for this deletion nomination, thanks Sajjad Altaf (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But since I've given some policy reasons prior to your response, that response makes no sense. - Sitush (talk) 01:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Answer It meets policies mentioned by you. Wikipedia's policies are so flawed, they can be constorted to meet any point of view you want and I have seen that and experienced. Sajjad Altaf (talk) 03:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 *'''Keep''' Agreed with [[User:Mar4d|Mar4d]], no policy based reason for this deletion nomination, thanks [[User:Sajjad Altaf|Sajjad Altaf]] ([[User talk:Sajjad Altaf|talk]]) 16:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 :*But since I've given some policy reasons prior to your response, that response makes no sense. - [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush|talk]]) 01:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
+*'''Answer''' It meets policies mentioned by you. [[Wikipedia]]'s policies are so flawed, they can be constorted to meet any point of view you want and I have seen that and experienced. [[User:Sajjad Altaf|Sajjad Altaf]] ([[User talk:Sajjad Altaf|talk]]) 03:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC)