Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/History: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
AnomieBOT (talk | contribs)
Bots
6,354,541 edits
Line 7: Line 7:
==History==
==History==
<!-- New AFD's should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
<!-- New AFD's should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serfdom in Tibet controversy}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Italian_soft_power}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Italian_soft_power}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John of Ibelin (died after 1250)}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John of Ibelin (died after 1250)}}

Revision as of 22:07, 4 February 2024

Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to History. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|History|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to History. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


History

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 no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 22:14, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Serfdom in Tibet controversy

AfDs for this article:
Serfdom in Tibet controversy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a fairly unusual XfD but I submit that this article is based in large part on original research, despite citing a decent number of sources. The entire article plays out as a tit-for-tat "China says this" vs "Tibet exile/apologist says that" and there isn't really an attempt to actually frame anything within the context of "what actually happened".

It's understandable to say "the issue is contentious" but when the entire article becomes a matter of paraphrasing different POVs, there's very little that a reader can actually take out of the article. The only "real" encyclopedic piece of work I can see is "Tibetan welfare after the Chinese takeover", which itself does not seem particularly germane to the question of whether serfdom existed in Tibet prior to 1951, other than, perhaps, insinuating that the Chinese government does not care about Tibet or rather that the Tibetan social structure is so rigid that reforms have only been partially successful. Regardless, it does not feel as if this segment is appropriate for inclusion as a matter of historicity.

The same topic is covered to some length in the article Social class in Tibet, which approaches a similar topic from a perspective much more aligned with the standards on Wikipedia. I understand that approaching an article entitled "Controversy" is understandably difficult, but articles like Investiture Controversy and Controversy in Russia regarding the legitimacy of eastward NATO expansion handle their respective topics with substantially more grace and include the proper historical context instead of devolving eventually to namedropping entities and/or historians and assigning respective quotations without any contextualization as to what they mean. Augend (drop a line) 22:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep & rewrite. Regardless of whether serfdom has or has not existed in Tibet, the topic has gained enough traction and is notable. A quick search of "serfdom in Tibet" on Google Scholar brings up loads of articles: [1]. Social class in Tibet is a suitable article, but I think this topic deserves its own page.
That being said, if this article survives AfD, it will need to be significantly rewritten. Definitely don't make WP:POV forks out of it, but then I agree that there must be significant effort to compare POVs into a coherent article. We can also jettison the "Human rights in Tibet" section. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 23:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep & rewrite. I'd mostly agree with The Lonely Panther's position here, that the debate itself deserves its own article, mostly even just to keep track of all the perspectives on the issues. The 'serfdom controversy' is significant enough on its own, as seen by the size of the literature, to deserve a separate article from Chinese administration in Tibet and the controversy over that.
Potential rewrite could for sure use a lot more definitions and information on the structure, prevalence, and development of class structures throughout Tibetan history. Additionally more detail on exactly which historical events contain 'competing versions of Tibetan History', such as the disagreements over the nature of the 1959 Tibetan Uprising, is vital. Literal sun (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:10, 12 February 2024 (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.
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 keep‎. ✗plicit 12:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Italian soft power

AfDs for this article:
Italian soft power (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page is created to defame the the country mentioned in it and not only this page but the author Ghalbeyakh of this page created and edited multiple pages to defame the respected parties such as Qatari soft power, Qatari involvement in higher education in the United States, Soft power and more. These are the pages edited by the author which seems to have a propaganda against a nation/party. some of his edits are marked as vandalism already. This author particularly seems to harming the authenticity of the Wikipedia policies. I would like to have a chance to prove this. Isouf Qaleed (talk) 06:45, 3 February 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 04:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John of Ibelin (died after 1250)

John of Ibelin (died after 1250) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability, no sources given. Even the name doesn't disambiguate correctly from John II, Lord of Beirut, and all sources I can find are about other Johns of Ibelin (often either the aforementioned or John, Old Lord of Beirut). ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 03:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - 10-minute search for sources at the usual locations only finds incidental mentions as part of the Ibelin house family trees. Page created in 2008 with a request for sources (infobox) present on the page since 2008... I doubt strongly this page meets notability criteria for an individual page - Mention as a member of the family tree is already present on House of Ibelin, which appears sufficient. Shazback (talk) 03:46, 3 February 2024 (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.
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 delete‎. ✗plicit 14:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of sovereign states in Europe

Timeline of sovereign states in Europe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't know whether this is an article or a list, but nevertheless it is a poorly organised mess of synthesis and original research. The term "sovereign state" does not even have a meaning for most of the periods this timeline purports to cover. Nice colours, though. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:23, 1 February 2024 (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.
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 Sudhanoti to Sudhanoti District and delete First Government of Sidhnuti Azad Kashmir on October 4,1947‎. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sudhanoti

Sudhanoti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Largely unverifiable. I can't find references to "Jassi Khan Siddozai", "Sidhnuti"[2], Sudhanoti combined with 1407[3]...

The same applies to other creations by same editor or around same topics, e.g. in First Government of Sidhnuti Azad Kashmir on October 4,1947, I checked the first two and the last sources, and neither mentions Sidhnuti or Sudhanoti. Fram (talk) 08:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC) Also nominated:[reply]

If these creations are indeed problematic, then the relevant edits to other articles like Sudhan and Sudhanoti District need to be reverted as well, and their other edits checked. Fram (talk) 08:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing is to check this article again
Because in this article
First Government of Sidhnuti Azad Kashmir on October 4,1947
It is clearly written that no government was established in Sidhnuti on October 4, 1947. Rather, on October 4, 1947, Siddhnuti, when all the areas of present-day Azad Kashmir were the first to be freed from Dogra continuity, the Azad Kashmir government was announced in Siddhnuti on October 4, 1947.
The government was established on 24 October 1947 at Chonjal Hill town of [Pallandri Tehsil] of Sudhanoti District.
The main reason for this was that on October 4, 1947, there was no parliamentary house in Siddhnuti from which the system of government could be run.
Therefore, this temporary government structure was started from Moti Mahal in Rawalpindi.
After which this rebel revolutionary government prepared a 40-room Parliament House at Sidhnuti Chunjal Hill within twenty days.
Subsequently, on 24 October 1947, the same government was shifted from Moti Mahal in Rawalpindi to Sidhnuti Chonjal Hill.
If you want more information then on October 4, 1947 the government announced in Sidhnuti
And on October 24, 1947, a whole book has been written on the government that was established in Palindri of Sidhanuti, you can visit it by opening the link.
https://www.academia.edu/43135608/Azad_Kashmir_is_it_Azad
_______
Secondly, the movement of Azad Kashmir was actually the movement of the Siddhnuti state because Siddhnuti has been an independent and independent state for many centuries.
That is why people believed in his independence.
I am not saying this, but all this is found in the history of world intellectuals. For references, see British historian (Ian Melville Stephens) book (Pakistan) 👇 https://www.google.com/search?q=Sudhnuti+ revolt&client=ms-android-samsung-gj-rev1&sca_esv=82c0f5fcf9e8a56e&biw=384&bih=714&tbm=bks&sxsrf=ACQVn08shxb3dVqOHMG6pvwM9yfbqJf7KQ%3A1706901368404&ei=eD-9ZZKZGOrBxc8Pn4O4iAM &udm=&oq=Sudhnuti+revolt&gs_lp=Eg9tb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXNlcnAiD1N1ZGhudXRpIHJldm9sdDIEECMYJ0jqTFD-M1igQHAAeACQAQCYAY0GoAH1HqoBCTMtMy4xLjMuMbgBA8gBAPgBAYoCGW1vYmlsZS1nd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAtbW9kZXOIBgE &sclient=mobile-gws-serp
In which he writes that the movement of Azad Kashmir was actually the Sidhnuti rebellion and the movement of Sidhnuti which later turned into the Azad Kashmir movement.
Such is the founding president of Azad Kashmir
Sardar Ibrahim Khan
He also writes in his book The Kashmir Saga. See the link👇
https://www.google.com/search?q=Sudhnuti+revolt+--+which+later+evolved+into+the+Azad+Kashmir+%27+movement+--+had+sent+men+across+the+Indus+Plain+into+Pathan+tribal+territory+to+seek+arms+.+At+this+time+%2C+and+on+into+November+%2C+the+future+political+relations+%28+if+any+%29&client=ms-android-samsung-gj-rev1&sca_esv=82c0f5fcf9e8a56e&biw=384&bih=770&tbm=bks&sxsrf=ACQVn0_0hEbhy4AYGoiLbint4SaCWdPv2g%3A1707146269720&ei=HfzAZe-2K4-A9u8PrdSF2Ak&oq=Sudhnuti+revolt+--+which+later+evolved+into+the+Azad+Kashmir+%27+movement+--+had+sent+men+across+the+Indus+Plain+into+Pathan+tribal+territory+to+seek+arms+.+At+this+time+%2C+and+on+into+November+%2C+the+future+political+relations+%28+if+any+%29&gs_lp=Eg9tb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXNlcnAi6gFTdWRobnV0aSByZXZvbHQgLS0gd2hpY2ggbGF0ZXIgZXZvbHZlZCBpbnRvIHRoZSBBemFkIEthc2htaXIgJyBtb3ZlbWVudCAtLSBoYWQgc2VudCBtZW4gYWNyb3NzIHRoZSBJbmR1cyBQbGFpbiBpbnRvIFBhdGhhbiB0cmliYWwgdGVycml0b3J5IHRvIHNlZWsgYXJtcyAuIEF0IHRoaXMgdGltZSAsIGFuZCBvbiBpbnRvIE5vdmVtYmVyICwgdGhlIGZ1dHVyZSBwb2xpdGljYWwgcmVsYXRpb25zICggaWYgYW55IClI9hNQ9wpY9wpwAHgAkAEAmAEAoAEAqgEAuAEDyAEA-AEBigIZbW9iaWxlLWd3cy13aXotc2VycC1tb2Rlc6gCAA&sclient=mobile-gws-serp مشرا (talk) 15:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion about Nawab Jassi Khan's rule in Sidhnuti has been answered by Pir Irshad's book. I have no more time to work on this free project. Do with this article as you see fit. Thanks, this is the last discussion from me. مشرا (talk) 09:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Academia.edu is not a reliable source, anyone can post there, and even then the source you give[6] doesn't even mention Sudhanoti/Sidhnuti... Your source about the Sidhnuti revolt[7] doesn't mention e.g. 1407, so I guess it is about the 4 October government? The quote you give at least mentions Sidhnuti, but that's it. Your second book, "The Kashmir Saga", literally repeats the first book. Do you have any reliable source for the independent kingdom founded in 1407? Fram (talk) 08:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the guide, there is an article on State Siddhanoti on Urdu Wikipedia. How about linking this article to the Sudhanoti article on the English Wikipedia? Link to article on State of Sudhnuti on Urdu Wikipedia👇
سدھنوتی ریاست
https://ur.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%B3%D8%AF%DA%BE%D9%86%D9%88%D8%AA%DB%8C_%D8%B1%DB%8C%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA مشرا (talk) 04:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to Sudhanoti District#History: The page as published is not ready for mainspace, it is mainly unreferenced original research. I think the combined info from all the sources make this a two paragraph summary in the target article, not a stand alone article. There is nothing properly sourced for a merge, but no objection to someone merging RS they think useful into the target.
re: First Government of Sidhnuti Azad Kashmir on October 4,1947 not ready for mainspace, a lot of words but very little information, and sources do not demonstrate notability for a stand alone article. This should Redirect to History of Azad Kashmir. There is nothing properly sourced for a merge, but no objection to someone merging RS they think useful into the target.
No objection to a consensus redirect(s) to another target.  // Timothy :: talk  05:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, redirect to Sudhanoti District. HistoriesUnveiler (talk) 21:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:32, 17 February 2024 (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.
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 delete‎. Hey man im josh (talk) 02:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khachatur-Bek of Mush

Khachatur-Bek of Mush (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
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.
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 Agʿazi as a natural ATD. Owen× ☎ 16:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agʿazi People

Agʿazi People (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG .There is hardly any sources on who or what the "Ag'azi People" even were, there is not enough source material for a separate article. As a result, most of the article is original research or just completely fabricated, with most of the sections being entirely unsourced (there's a few places where the editor cites a source, but doesn't it corroborate with the text). There is already a separate article called Agʿazi, so this is also arguably a WP:BADFORK. Socialwave597 (talk) 05:33, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I searched all the digital sources for the term "Agʿazi", and couldn't find it in any of them. Maybe some of the non-digital sources have more information, but the majority of sources on a topic not mentioning the topic doesn't give me confidence. Cortador (talk) 07:57, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Agʿazi as a content fork: It really seems to be the same topic, even if the current lede of the target article refers to geography. The content here is mostly WP:OR and should not be merged with the target article. I do find some results with "Agazian" from Google Books, but nothing really useful. The emergence of this article might be indirectly related to a recent Agazian movement, See discussion at https://www.iwgia.org/en/eritrea/4216-iw-2021-eritrea.html Jähmefyysikko (talk) 12:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or possibly Redirect to Agʿazi (I agree there's effectively nothing to merge, in any case). Presumably the inhabitants of Agʿazi were "Agʿazian people" but, as @Socialwave597 pointed out, this is a bad fork. Heretofore, Wikipedia described Agʿazi as an area of the Aksumite Empire, not an ethnicity therein nor as a predecessor to it. In addition to the sourcing problems that Socialwave597 specified, this also had an orphaned (& since fixed) {{sfn}} citation (leading me to think the article was cobbled together via unattributed WP:COPYPASTE), and another citation to a WP:SPS. Those concerns were met with no response when I brought them up; the other concerns were met with WP:IDHT. I might have thought this could be WP:DRAFTified, but there are other issues regarding the article's creator. Those are outside the scope of this AfD, of course, but it makes me skeptical that said draft would reach a suitable state. @Jähmefyysikko: I read about the Agazian movement at the link you provided. I am not at all sure whether that explains the creator's motivations (or whether the creator is even aware of it; I'll WP:AGF for now), but the subject matter suggests some perceived "ultra-Habesha" subset of Habesha peoples, which (FWIW) is another article (now indef. protected per WP:HORN) with a history of WP:NOR, but toward the opposite of that Agazian concept. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    they did exist, but i only have ss's proving their existence, and i dont think i can send screen shots on wikipedia. KallebTigray (talk) 03:49, 2 February 2024 (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.
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 delete‎. ✗plicit 04:42, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hammadid expedition to Tlemcen (1058)

Hammadid expedition to Tlemcen (1058) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I think this article is a combination of embroidery and original research. The background section does not relate specifically to the topic and is in any case unclear in meaning. The substantive content of the article is the two sentences “ The Hammadids launched a campaign against the Ifrenids, seizing Tlemcen in the process. However, they opted not to retain control over the city and instead focused on consolidating their holdings in the eastern regions.” This carries three citations, of which two are offline but the third does not support the existence of a Hammadid expedition to Tlemcen in 1058. The aftermath section, like the background, is just generic padding. There is very little substance here, what there is is not supported by the accessible source, and a search for “hammadid tlemcen” and “tlemcen 1058” brings up nothing at all to support the existence of this expedition, never mind its notability Mccapra (talk) 22:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I thought this would be yet another passing mention somewhere being turned into a military history stub, but I can't even find any mention of this anywhere, even in passing. For the three cited sources: 1) Ibn Khaldun doesn't say this; 2) Ferchain isn't accessible but a Google snippet search ([8]) doesn't even find the date "1058" inside; and 3) a historical atlas (Lugan) is unlikely to mention an evidently minor event in any detail. A brief search of other books and articles yields nothing. No way this meets notability, even if it were accurate. R Prazeres (talk) 00:08, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft-deletion as a recently-restored article (redirect was reverted).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:17, 7 February 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. I don't see a consensus here. If it was up to me, I'd suggest considering a merge or draftification but that is not an AFD closure decision. Liz Read! Talk! 03:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thajuddin

Thajuddin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article is about Chera Perumals of Makotai and specially it covers Legend of Cheraman Perumals and it already covered about Thajuddin. But the current article is not give reliable source and some sources NOT directly confirm certain events. Splitting of the Moon is a believe, not historical and scientific event. Did Thajuddin lived during the time of Muhammad or after Mohamed? Legend of Cheraman Perumals already cover the topic and no need to have another non proven person. AntanO 18:26, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The inclusion of Thajuddin's page in Wikipedia is justified as it encapsulates a significant historical and cultural figure. While acknowledging the challenges regarding source reliability, Thajuddin represents a figure of substantial folklore and tradition, contributing to the rich tapestry of cultural narratives. Despite the debate surrounding the historical accuracy of certain events attributed to him, his presence in historical discussions provides insight into the socio-political milieu of his time. Thajuddin's purported existence, whether contemporaneous with or postdating Muhammad, offers a lens through which to explore the interplay of legend and history in the broader narrative of the Cheraman Perumals and their era. Therefore, his inclusion fosters a more comprehensive understanding of the cultural heritage and historical discourse surrounding the Cheraman Perumals of Makotai. DonParlo (talk) 19:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Kings are notable. But, Why this duplicate page (Chera Perumals of Makotai and Legend of Cheraman Perumals)? Already this article was declined. User already mentioned it as folklore and tradition, and it already covered in Legend of Cheraman Perumals. There is no reliable source, and the reliable sources point to Cheraman Perumal, not so called Thajuddin who met Muhammad (from Kerala to Mecca). --AntanO 11:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand the concern about potential duplication and the classification of the topic as folklore and tradition, but the existence of a separate page dedicated to Thajuddin, who purportedly met Muhammad, serves to provide a focused platform for exploring this aspect of Kerala's history and its cultural narratives. While it may be acknowledged as folklore, documenting such narratives contributes to the broader understanding of regional legends and their cultural significance. Moreover, although sources may vary in reliability, the presence of differing accounts underscores the diversity of perspectives and interpretations within historical discourse. As such, maintaining a distinct page for Thajuddin allows for a nuanced examination of this figure and his alleged encounter, enriching the discourse surrounding Kerala's historical and cultural landscape. The article in Legend of Cheraman Perumals does not cover this Legend in detail. DonParlo (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
//Thajuddin, who purportedly met Muhammad, serves to provide a focused platform for exploring this aspect of Kerala's history and its cultural narratives// Can you give reliable source for such claim? --AntanO 15:14, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
^ O. Loth, Arabic Manuscripts in the Library of the India Office (London: Secretary of State of India, 1877), no. 1044.
^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g Y. Friedmann, "Qissat Shakarwati Farmad: A Tradition Concerning the Introduction of Islam to Malabar", Israel Oriental Studies 5 (1975), 239-241.
^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Prange, Sebastian R. Monsoon Islam: Trade and Faith on the Medieval Malabar Coast. Cambridge University Press, 2018. 95-98.
^ Y. Friedmann, "Qissat Shakarwati Farmad: A Tradition Concerning the Introduction of Islam to Malabar", Israel Oriental Studies 5 (1975), 239-241.
^ H. H. Wilson, Mackenzie Collection. A descriptive catalogue of the Oriental manuscripts and other articles illustrative of the literature, history, statistics and antiquities of the south of India (Calcutta, 1828), II, appendix, p. XCV.
^ Prange, Sebastian R. Monsoon Islam: Trade and Faith on the Medieval Malabar Coast. Cambridge University Press, 2018. 98. DonParlo (talk) 20:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.scribd.com/document/519315791/Qissat-Shakarwati-Farmad-a-Tradition-Con DonParlo (talk) 20:44, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at this objectively this wiki page does not do that much significant to anything. So what's the point of deleting it. I think people should keep this page. Is it gives a deeper insight into the legend. ஸ்டீவன் ஸ்கால் (talk) 15:19, 7 February 2024 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE --Blablubbs (talk) 02:41, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. To begin with the subject of the page Thajuddin, there is no reference that it was formerly called Tamil King Cheraman Perumal. More so, there are contentious websites and some references that are just scraps as if someone did a Google search to find a word and used it as a testimony for a much larger paragraph. I find it impossible to verify the paragraphs from the references given. RangersRus (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Legend of Cheraman Perumals. The legend of the introduction of Islam to India is certainly notable, but the present article presents this legend as fact. The Legend of Cheraman Perumals article can be expanded with the specific events in the legend (the vision of the split moon and the pilgrimage to Mecca) if Indian historiographic sources are sufficient to verify that this is, in fact, part of the known legend. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:28, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Merge would be good, but need to cleanup per RS. AntanO 19:57, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sock !votes --Blablubbs (talk) 02:41, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Keep: It is a important to keep this page as it expands on the over all legend and story of Thajuddin putting it in other pages such as the Legend of Cheraman Perumals doesn't do it justice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by சரோகம (talk • contribs) 22:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep: Keeping the wiki page on Thajuddin's existence is justified for several reasons. Firstly, Thajuddin is a figure recognized by Islamic scholars, lending credibility to his historical existence. Numerous Arabic texts, including works like the Qissat Shakarwati-Farmad, reference him, along with recorded hadiths attributed to Abu Sa’id al-Khudri. Moreover, the presence of a tomb dedicated to Thajuddin in Oman serves as tangible evidence supporting his existence. Therefore, considering the scholarly acknowledgment, textual references, and physical evidence, maintaining the wiki page on Thajuddin is logical and warranted.
    ManOfJusticekk (talk) 05:20, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Last relisting did not establish any clear consensus, but only few sock votes. Relisting again for clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:21, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:55, 22 February 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 12:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Rauf Mehdi

Mohammad Rauf Mehdi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacking sources and not very well-known. Historianfox (talk) 10:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes he doesn't seem to be very significant. Could be insufficient for Wiki Rapanomics (talk) 03:38, 4 February 2024 (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.
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 delete‎. ✗plicit 00:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of A-Scan (1 Dimension) OCT (1981-1990)

History of A-Scan (1 Dimension) OCT (1981-1990) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Scope is extremely specific and doesn't make sense as a standalone article. Instead, this could best be included in Optical coherence tomography or even as part of a new "History of optical coherence tomography" article, although the content isn't optimal for mainspace. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 00:40, 29 January 2024 (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.
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 delete‎. ✗plicit 14:10, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of participants at the Battle of Badr

List of participants at the Battle of Badr (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

unsourced mess of a list that admits it's incomplete. blow it up. ltbdl (talk) 01:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Battle of Badr. A bit messy, but still not a good reason to delete the article. Plus the battle is already notable. Draftification can be an alternative based on what you gave. Brachy08 (Talk) 01:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist to discuss the merits of merging vs deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The WordsmithTalk to me 23:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I've got to agree with the main points stated above. Merely being in a battle doesn't merit a list article. Merging isn't appropriate, because there's nothing to merge: a reliable source, currently lacking, is required for each item to be merged. Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 23:51, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I've also got to agree with the main points above, merely being in a battle doesn't give an individual any notability, it feels very WP:COOKIE to include every person, and as AndyTheGrump said, articles listing the participants at other battle would run into the millions. It would be little more than a database. Shaws username . talk . 00:40, 13 February 2024 (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.
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 delete‎. The source analysis by TimothyBlue is persuasive and has remained unrebutted. Sandstein 15:24, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Viola Pettus

Viola Pettus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article has three sources for notability: a deadlink to a local newspaper allegedly saying she ran a schoolhouse and two articles referencing a minor character inspired by her in a relatively obscure play by Richard Montoya. Running a one-room school was not unusual and neither was working as a nurse during the Spanish Flu epidemic (even if there were a reliable source for that claim).

Google searches for Pettus turn up an image of her gravesite on facebook, a local blog post from 2007, more references to the Montoya play and some census records. Pettus's sole even arguably noteworthy attribute appears to have been a minor appearance in the Montoya play. Jbt89 (talk) 05:15, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Google Books search brings up a few references and this person appears to be notable. I'll make changes to the article after work tomorrow. Dr vulpes (Talk) 07:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Took a look and found two (other than cemetery stuff): "REAL NURSING: Every Second Counts!!
    " which makes essentially the same unsourced assertions as the article does, and "Revealed The Kingdom of Locs Nazirite Vow Continues, Volume 2" which copied the passage from the nursing book verbatim and generally seems like it was generated by a web scraper.
    Personally I'd be a lot more comfortable accepting that she's even locally famous other than in connection with the Montoya play if there was a book or newspaper article stating that from before this article and the play were written in 2010, but I'm curious to see what you find. So far the argument for her notability all seems to boil down to that play IMO, which isn't good enough for a standalone article. Jbt89 (talk) 22:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Dr Vulpes. Expand and improve; do not delete. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 14:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More specific discussion regarding sourcing would be helpful in establishing a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)*Comment - The only addition I was able to find through Google Books was a Lulu.com publishing, which means self published, and it's recent enough it may have copied Wikipedia. Searching newspapers.com I found a short paragraph in the Los Angeles Times from August 16, 2010 and the Hartford Courant from September 9, 2012, but both of these are in context of the Montoya play. There well may be better but more obscure sources, but I'd recommend a re-list so experts might possibly find them, rather than a keep close at this point. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:18, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:01, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth.
Source eval:
Comments Source
404 1. Glover, Mark (2008). "African-American school in Alpine seeks historic recognition". The Big Bend Sentinel. Retrieved 2010-08-16.
Census 2. ^ US Census (1910) Census Place: Justice Precinct 3, Brewster, Texas; Roll T624_1533; Page: 6A; Enumeration District: 6; Image: 608.
Census 3. ^ US Census (1920) Census Place: Justice Precinct 3, Brewster, Texas; Roll T625_1781; Page: 7A; Enumeration District: 14; Image: 1071.
One sentence "In “American Night” Kimberly Scott plays an almost forgotten historical figure, an African-American woman from West Texas named Viola Pettus, who during the 1918 flu epidemic nursed the children of whites, blacks and Mexicans.", fails SIGCOV 4. ^ Taylor, Kate (2010-08-10). "American History, With Shakespeare as Inspiration". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2024-01-15.
404 5. ^ Montoya, Richard; Culture Clash (2010). "American Night: The Ballad of Juan José". OSF 75th Season. Oregon Shakespeare Festival. Retrieved 2010-08-16.
One sentence "Not much has been written about Viola Pettus, but playwright Richard Montoya is as insistent on including her in the annals of American history as she was insistent on treating the sick of all ages and colors.", fails SIGCOV 6. ^ Morris, Steven Leigh (2012-03-15). "American Night: The Ballad of Juan Jose, From Richard Montoya and Culture Clash". LA Weekly. Retrieved 2020-06-23.
Keep votes provided no sources or guidelines to eval.  // Timothy :: talk  06:40, 4 February 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. The arguments have been brief, and there doesn't seem an obvious consensus from the discussion. I have given drive-by IP comments less weight. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:02, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Akora Khattak

Battle of Akora Khattak (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There seems to be some confusion (among sources), as to the date, location, and even name of this battle. So is it one battle or synthases of more than one action?

Also all of the sources seem to be single-line mentions, (at least the ones that I can check). Slatersteven (talk) 16:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 16:51, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Most sources are unreliable and some are hard to verify. Couple sources have one-liners about the battle except for one. The date is disputed among sources. I do not see any useful contribution of this article.RangersRus (talk) 02:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A significant battle and has good coverage in reliable sources. Referencing can be improved but the sources already present in the article are also enough to have this article on Wikipedia. Muneebll (talk) 10:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 04:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 06:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know on which basis some editors here can call it poorly sourced. One just has to visit the article to verify that the sources are good enough to merit a stand-alone article. Sutyarashi (talk) 06:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note for closer: Please take a closer look at the !votes of IPs, because they are very clearly sockpuppets based on their similar arguments and the fact that they have made edit only at this AfD thread. Sutyarashi (talk) 09:06, 2 February 2024 (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.


History Proposed deletions

History categories

for occasional archiving

Proposals

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/History&oldid=1203439436"