Talk:Maharaja Narendra Singh

This page was proposed for deletion by SKAG123 (talk · contribs) on 10 October 2023.

Proposed for deletion because of source reliability?

@SKAG123, you proposed this article for deletion noting the sources are unreliable - can you go over each source and explain the problem? Thanks! —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:35, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One of the sources in a YouTube video

Not sure what portions of the article use it.

स्तंभ || If कंदर्पी घाट || झंझारपुर , मधुबनी Episode - 1,

rest of the sources look reliable at first glance

there is also a lot of improper formatting and in general, poorly written content. It might be better to just start over. SKAG123 (talk) 03:26, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SKAG123, thanks. I've removed the PROD tag. If the article has reliable sources, the subject's notable and should not be deleted even if the article needs work; deletion ≠ cleanup.

If you still feel uneasy about this article, I suggest taking it to AfD to get more eyeballs reviewing it (as opposed to just the two of us).

Thanks for caring about our articles' quality!

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 03:33, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I added more sources and written more into it. Thewikiuser1999 (talk) 20:47, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Thewikiuser1999 Sources need to be reliable, not just extant. - Sitush (talk) 17:34, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are reliable and mention the events of Battle of Kandarpi Ghat. You're destroying a good article for bo reason. Thewikiuser1999 (talk) 20:01, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

no* Thewikiuser1999 (talk) 20:12, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Thewikiuser1999 Please read User talk:Thewikiuser1999 - you are headed towards a shedload of trouble. And please self-revert your most recent edits here and at Maharaja Narendra Singh. - Sitush (talk) 20:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added valid source + page number. Thewikiuser1999 (talk) 20:45, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush, can you elaborate on which sources are reliable and relevant -- and which are not? And also why or why not? So far, I just see two editors disagreeing in general terms but not working through the specifics and explaining their reasoning.

Thanks,

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 00:32, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@A. B. It is a meta issue because Thewikiuser is doing the same across several articles. Hence I dealt with it on their User talk page. They have been citing papers from Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, none of which are peer reviewed & which is an often politicised body, subject to the whims of whoever is in government. They've been citing a modern translation of a centuries-old document which falls foul of WP:PRIMARY & is contrary to the widely accepted premises of WP:HISTRS & WP:RAJ. They have also been using a book published in 1970 by an outfit so obscure I haven't heard of it in my 60 years, 15 or so of them as something of an India specialist here on WP. That book seems to have been written by a school principal, not an academic historian, and it's tone & style are typical of much poor history published at that time in that country. Another work they have been citing was actually published with a typo in its title - not a great indication of attention to detail. - Sitush (talk) 02:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Thewikiuser1999, can you respond to Sitush's critique of the individual sources you used for this article? I'm not interested in his critique of your overall editing style or your response to his critique - I'm just interested in this article's current and previous references.

Thanks!

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@A. B. Just in case you are unfamiliar with some specific aspects of source reliability in this topic area, things such as the NCERT controversy and the Mithila State Movement have a background/tangential relevance (obscure, I know, but unfortunately symptomatic & insidious). - Sitush (talk) 03:25, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looks complicated!

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:22, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@A. B. Thewikieditor1999 is now topic banned anyway. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That simplifies things. Thanks for your patience with my questions. I review each day's PRODs and I was trying to understand this one.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 16:47, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user is highly biased against Specific Pages. Thewikiuser1999 (talk) 17:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]