Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/History

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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

[edit]

Battle of Bajrur

[edit]
Battle of Bajrur (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)

Low quality article about a non notable event with limited coverage within sources + the third ref does not contain a link to a book whose content can be verified. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 01:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Rumal

[edit]
Battle of Rumal (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)

Low quality article about a relatively non notable event with limited coverage within sources. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 01:26, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:59, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Bolling Brandegee

[edit]
Robert Bolling Brandegee (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:NARTIST. Bbb23 (talk) 14:57, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This seems wrong to me. First Bbb23 removed all text from the article, then nominated it for deletion. See the version of 04:45, May 3, 2023‎ by GoodDay for what it looked like before all content was removed. It seems to me that Mr Brandegee was a minor painter but he did exhibit at notable venues (the Society of American Artists, the Exposition Universelle (1889), the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, the National Academy of Design, and elsewhere). As these were juried shows, he seems to meet at least notability citerion 4(b) "been a substantial part of a significant exhibition". with best wishes Daderot (talk) 15:17, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The material I removed was unsourced, but I should have mentioned it in my nomination statement.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:21, 3 August 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.

Adam Fox Building

[edit]
Adam Fox Building (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)

It does not meet presumed notability under WP:NBUILD and while it might mean something in the local community, it's just a run of the mill old building that doesn't warrant an encyclopedia article and the sources don't meet the threshold of independent significant coverage needed for for GNG. This appears to be a part of the broader walled garden on Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA buildings/subject matter. Graywalls (talk) 22:43, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of windmills in Friesland (T–V)

[edit]
List of windmills in Friesland (T–V) (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)

Unclear why we would need such a detailed list of a type of building, most of which are not individually notable and no longer existing. Replicating other, highly specialised databases here is not really the purpose of Wikipedia. There are or were more than 20,000 windmills in the Netherlands, and many more in other countries. Fram (talk) 15:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep All - per WP:NLIST - the individual windmills do not need to be notable. As the editor doing the majority of work on the various lists of windmills, I've been using my discretion to include all windmills which can be verified to have existed. That the Friesland list has had to be split into several sub-lists is determined by the amount of templates that can be included before the limit size is exceeded. There are over 100 lists of windmills, many of which include all mills. Are we to delete those too? Mjroots (talk) 15:28, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The individual entries don't need to be notable if the group is notable, and even then "editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles." A list which needs to be split in 9 separate pages is a large list, and a discussion whether this isn't overkill (assuming the group is notable) is perfectly acceptable, independent of whether we have other lists of windmills or not (I note that many of these other lists seem to be limited to still existing windmills, not including the often shortlived ones from the past). Fram (talk) 15:37, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The majority of the UK windmills lists cover all known windmills. Mjroots (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And articles like List of windmills in North Brabant cover only the existing ones, no idea what your point is or how this is relevant for this AfD discussion. Fram (talk) 16:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The intention is for all Netherlands windmills lists to cover all mills. Also Belgium as their mills are also well documented. It is easier to verify mills standing than those not standing, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to cover those lost. We've both said our piece, now let's let other editors have their say. Mjroots (talk) 16:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Condense down to a single list of the entries that have their own articles, as a reasonable navigation aid (as much as I think that gets overused, it's actually pretty appropriate here). Otherwise, this is just a massive database dump. It may or may not even be reasonable to combine all the separate province lists into a single list for the whole country, but I'll remain ambivalent on that one. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:19, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bank of Carmel

[edit]
Bank of Carmel (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)

extra hyper-local run of the mill buildings that does not fall under WP:GEOFEAT because it's not protected under national status. Trivial coverage in an Oakland newspaper and SF Chronicle, lots of snippet coverages based on ultra hyper-local Carmel-Pinecone weekly tabloid. This appears to be part of the ongoing construction of Carmel-by-the-Sea related walled garden by one creator. Graywalls (talk) 16:10, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - I haven't yet looked into all of the sources, but at least half of the current ones are press releases, they are not even "trivial coverage", they are press-release based PR announcements placed in newspapers, not SIGCOV. See Wikipedia:Independent_sources#Press_releases for more information. Netherzone (talk) 16:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What you call press releases are actually important pieces of primary source information that tells a story and is part of the history! For example, "Carmel Notes". Oakland Tribune. Oakland, California. 14 Oct 1923. p. 25. Retrieved 2022-05-24, says "Carmel's new bank was the first and only one the city has had." This indicates it was the first bank in Carmel-by-the-Sea, California, which is significant. Greg Henderson (talk) 17:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, they are press releases. Netherzone (talk) 22:32, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I can't tell if the article is supposed to be about the short-lived bank or the building. If it's about the bank, it fails the WP:NCORP test of WP:SIGCOV in WP:SIRS, and if it's about the building, which is not on any historic registers that carry presumed notability, it fails WP:NBUILD, which calls for "significant in-depth coverage." What's offered here is a series of primary sources, trivial local newspaper mentions, and unreliable sources like Arcadia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:57, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree with the nom that this is part of the Carmel WP:Walled garden, yet another run of the mill local building that is not on the NRHP, thus failing WP:BUILD. I am also in agreement with Dclemens1971 that as a bank it does not meet WP:NCORP criteria for SIRS & SIGCOV. The creator still does not seem to understand that notability is not inherited from allegedly "notable" people associated with the structure. What we have in terms of sourcing is: 1) a nomination form by the Parks & Recreation (primary source); 2) a press-release printed in a newspaper (primary source); 3) another press release (primary source), 4) another press release (primary source); 5) a photo and photo caption in a tourist-trade book published by a marginal publisher (Arcadia) whose reliability is questionable (not SIGCOV and low-quality source); 6) a short piece without a by-line in the hyper-local weekly tabloid, The Pine Cone; 7) a meeting agenda (primary source, really wondering why this is even included?); 8) a 404 dead link in The Pine Cone (hyper local weekly tabloid); 9) an advertisement in The Pine Cone (WTF?); 10) a photo and caption in a report by the City of Carmel (primary source). None of this contributes to the notability of the bank as a business nor the building, therefore also fails WP:GNG. Netherzone (talk) 22:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Looks like Netherzone and Graywalls always come to the plate to delete good articles that have plenty of sources, including primary and secondary ones. This Deletionists mentality is a reason why many have criticism of Wikipedia. An enclypodia should free to write on many topics both of local and national interest. Based on WP:GNG, the article has significant coverage in reliable sources. More sources have been included in the edit request. Instead of trying to delte articles we should be encouraging fellow Wikipedians to add additional sources if needed. I feel that some people are to quick to judge and just delete articles they don't like. That shouldn't be how an enclypodia works to educate them on topics like the first bank in Carmel! Greg Henderson (talk) 23:43, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Part of a campaign to get every last ditch of Carmel-by-the-Sea related stuff into Wikipedia, even if they are not notable and there is little to no reliable sourcing, which includes this article. Most of the article's sources are not independent of the subject or are press releases. HarukaAmaranth 01:28, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please also see edit request sources. BTW, the Carmel Bank was a pretty notable bank in its day. It was the first bank in that city. Greg Henderson (talk) 01:47, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The various superlatives of first, biggest, richest, largest, oldest in a local villages and townships are not a cause for creating an encyclopedia article. Graywalls (talk) 03:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete For the reasons outlined by Dclemens1971 and Netherzone Axad12 (talk) 09:39, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – Netherzone's thorough source-by-source analysis is spot-on as usual, and Dclemens1971 also provides an accurate summary of the available coverage and how it squares up to notability guidelines. Left guide (talk) 11:29, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete WP is not a platform for local tourism projects, we have guidelines for establishing notability which requires a certain standard from sources, none of which are met here. HighKing++ 14:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I disagree. This is certainly not tourism! It about the history of bank, which was the 1st bank in the village of Carmel-by-the-Sea. Greg Henderson (talk) 20:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Fails WP:GNG and part of a Carmel-by-the-Sea walled garden of non notable entities 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:13, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Honestly, it's looking like WP:CreatedbyGregHenderson is going to wind up as one of the tacit reasons to advocate deletion. An obvious GNG fail to anyone not GH, and if he wants to continue to promote Carmel following his community block at ANI, he can do so on his own website, and best of luck to him. Ravenswing 22:55, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conquest of Sindan

[edit]
Conquest of Sindan (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)

Examining the sources The article appears to push a caste-POV rather than provide clear information about the military conflict. From John F. Richards' source, there is only a single line about the conflict, which is part of a larger table listing numerous minor conflicts. This brief mention does not reference Arabs, Abbasids, or Sindh; it simply notes that a commander named Bhoja expelled a Muslim garrison from a place called Sindan in 839. There is no mention of caste, Abbasids, or Arabs in this reference. The article's author cites Richards inaccurately (Richards didn't cover the area which the author cited).

The sources by H.C. Ray and Al-Baladhuri fall under WP:RAJ and WP:AGEMATTERS, and K.M. Munshi's "Glory That Was Gurjara Desa" praises the Gurjar caste without describing the conflict in depth or mentioning the Abbasids or Sindh province (not even the year). Likewise, R.C. Majumdar, Praful Kartha, and Hem Chandra Ray do not mention a conflict in Sindhan between the Abbasids and the Rajput confederacy. The assumption that the Muslims defeated by Bhoja in 839 were Abbasids and that Sindh was a Caliphal province is clearly original research and synthesis of sources.

None of the sections accurately describe the "conquest"; they discuss unrelated events, and the lack of in-depth coverage makes it clear that the article fails WP:GNG. Only about 5% of the article covers the respective event, and that is based on a single line by J.F. Richards. The author has created similar articles that contain original research and caste POV pushing. The context can be found in the article List of early Hindu–Muslim military conflicts in the Indian subcontinent, and none of the listed conflicts in that article have enough notability to warrant a separate article. Fails WP:GNG, and the article is a product of WP:SYNTH and OR. Imperial[AFCND] 07:14, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note to the closer:

Please review the background and edit history of the voters (whether they are for "keep" or "delete"). Articles related to Indian history, especially those concerning wars, battles, and sieges, are often sensitive and have been subject to active meatpuppetry for a long time. Kindly disregard comments from active POV pushers, as I discovered this article through the contributions of one.--Imperial[AFCND] 07:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Bhutala

[edit]
Battle of Bhutala (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 reliable sources (WP:RS) mention a "Battle of Bhutala," nor do any of the references cited in the article. The article lacks notability, as even the authors Srivastav Ashoka and Somani Ram Vallabh are unsure about the year the battle occurred, and they cannot confirm if the leader was Iltutmish of the Delhi Sultanate. Neither the background nor the battle sections provide details about the events related to this alleged battle.

The battle section is a direct copy of a primary Indian inscription from Hamir Mada Mardan, dated to the 13th century and written by one of the participants, making it unreliable. The aftermath section is disorganized, failing to specify details about the war, belligerents, or aftermath. The article consists of WP:SYNTH and original research, with no reliable sources confirming the battle or its details. As such, the article fails the notability criteria. Imperial[AFCND] 06:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note to the closer:

Please review the background and edit history of the voters (whether they are for "keep" or "delete"). Articles related to Indian history, especially those concerning wars, battles, and sieges, are often sensitive and have been subject to active meatpuppetry for a long time. Kindly disregard comments from active POV pushers, as I discovered this article through the contributions of one.--Imperial[AFCND] 06:41, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jhala Man Singh

[edit]
Jhala Man Singh (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)

While there are several passing WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of this figure in Indian history, I can find no WP:SIGCOV of Jhala Man Singh/Bida Jhala/Jhala Manna. (The sources provided also include only trivial mentions or are unreliable per WP:NEWSORGINDIA.) Disputed PROD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See sources Mewar & the Mughal Emperors (1526-1707 A.D.) - Page 94 Man Singh Jhala was in the command of left wing...and was assisted by Jhala Bida of Badi - Sadri
Akbar the Great: Political history, 1542-1605 A.D clearly mentions Jhala Bida of Badi Sadri Raged Pratihar (talk) 05:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC). Suspected sock of R2dra[12].[reply]
  • Delete This is part of the ongoing caste-based bias in Indian history. The practice of caste pushing has migrated to Wikipedia, often through coordinated efforts (meatpuppetry indeed). Creating articles for self-gratification and caste pride is becoming increasingly common on Wikipedia. Fails enough notability and not enough significance to have a seperate article, and the article body itself is biased and OR.--Imperial[AFCND] 07:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @ImperialAficionado do you think Govt of India is fool to publish stamp dedicated to Jhala Manna??
    Stop pushing muslim pov Raged Pratihar (talk) 05:01, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sharma, Mewar and the Mughal Emperors: "Most of die gallant warriors like Jhala Man Singh, Kathor Shankar Das, Rawat Netsi and others made a stand against the Mughals for some dmc; but a band of body-guard of Man Singh fought bravely against them which made them retreat. The retreating forces were hotly pursued and many a Raj¬ put met his death. Thus on the very day at noon the regular battle terminated in the Mughal victory. Then the victorious army of Man Singh returned to its camp, though the Bhils did not spare them and conducted black-mail till night and deprived the enemy of their provisions which they had stored."
  • Srivastava, Akbar the Great discusses this battle but an excerpt is not available. However, in :*Srivastava, The Mughal Empire, he records the following details: "In April 1576, [Akbar] sent a powerful army under Man Singh of Amber to invade the remnant of Mewar. From Mandal Garh (in eastern Mewar) Man Singh proceeded by way of Mohi (south of Raj Samudra Lake) towards Gogunda and encamped on the plain at the northern end of Haldi Ghati, a spur of the Aravalli chain, between that town and the village of Khamnaur on the, southern bank of the river Banas. Here the imperial army was attacked, by Pratap, who marched from Gogunda to check the advance of the invader on June 18, 1576. Tradition has magnified the Rana’s army to twenty thousand horse and that of Man Singh to eighty thousand. The fact, however, is that the Mewar force did not exceed three thousand horse and a few hundred Bhil infantry, Man Singh commanded ten thousand picked cavahy of whom nearly four thousand were Kachhwaha Rajputs, one thousand other Hindus and^the remaining were. mostly central Asian Turks, Uzbegs, Kazzaqs with a thousand Sayyids of Barha and Shaikhzadas of Fatehpur Sikri. ... [T]he. centre was under the command of Man Singh himself. Issuing from behind the Haldi Ghati the Rana made a frontal attack on the Mughul army which lay on the plain to the north-west of the foot-ti.irk al ilic northci II entrance of llic ghali. So desperate \vas the cliaige that the A'lnglml vanguard and left wing were scattered and its rigl-.t wing and centre were hard pressed. But the Rana’s army was very small in number and he had no reserve or rear guard to bark up his initial sueress. In his attempt, therefore, to break the enemy centre and right wing he hurled his war-elephants against tliem. But the arrows and bullets form tlie other side proved too much even for the death-defying Sisodia heroes. In the personal combat between the Kachhwaha and Sisodia heroes many of the latter fell \’ictims to the Muslim bullets and arrows shot indiscriminately at the Rajputs by fanatics like Badayuni. Raja Ram Shah Tan^^•ar. who figured in front of the Rana in the thick of fighting in order to ‘shield him from attack was slain by Jagannath Kachhwaha. The imperial reserve now came to join the battle and a rumour spread that Akbar had arrived in person to assist Man Singh. The Rana was now surrounded by the enemy and was about to be cut off. But Bida Jhala snatched the crown from Pratap’s head, rushed to the front and cried out that he was the Rana. The enemy crowded round him and the pressure on Pratap was released. At this critical time some faithful soldiers seized the reins of the Rana’s horse and took him safely to the rear of the line. Bida fell fighting loyally to save his master. At this the Rana’s men lost heart and turned away from the field, leaving a large number of their dead behind. The battle of Haldi Ghati was over. The loss on both the sides was very heavy, the Rana losing nearly half ol the entire force. The imperial troops were so much exhausted that they could not think of pursuing the Rana and passed the dreadful night in apprehension of a surprise attack In fact, they could not gauge the magnitude of their success until next morning. The Rana evacuated Gogunda, and Man Singh then made arrangements for its occupation. Notwithstanding his best efforts, Man Singh did not succeed in reducing that fraction of Mewar (north-western region including Kumbhalgarh and Deosuri) which still remained in the hands of the Rana. He could not hold Gogunda for long owing to want of provisions and the hostility of the people. Neither his threats nor persuasion would bring Pratap round. The indomitable Sisodia king, though reduced to starvation on more than one occasion, did not condescend to lower his pride and acknowledge Akbar’s suzerainty, much less to agree to a matrimonial alliance with him. Man Singh fell in disfavour with Akbar for his failure and was recalled to court."
Other sources indicate that Jhala Man Singh and Man Singh I are the same person.
  • Singh, Thirty Decisive Battles of Jaipur. "The Maharana at that moment was so closely surrounded by the foes that the Rajputs of both the sides felt extreme anxiety for the safety of his-life. Even Sakat Singh, the brother of the Maharana, who due to fraternal dissension had left Mewar and was fighting on the imperial side, began to feel great concern for the life of his brother. Seeing no way out of the impasse, Jhala Man Singh at once snatched away the head-jewel, the regal umbrella and other insignia of the crown of Mewar from the Maharana and put them on his own person, although the Maharana was most reluctant to leave the field of battle at the risk of the life of his trusted kinsman and warrior. Just as his grand-father Jhala Ajja had assumed the leadership of the Rajputs at Bayana and died on the field of battle fighting against Babar’s army, when Rana Sanga was compelled to leave the battle-field due to wounds, in almost similar circumstances Jhala Man led the remnant of the Mewar army against the Mughals and thus saved the precious life of the Maharana."
  • Hyland, The Warhorse, similar discussion on page 172.
  • Sarkar, A History of Jaipur, similar coverage of the Battle of Haldighati on pages 51ff.
Given the lack of evidence that these are different people and that the sourcing in the article and offered by the one "Keep" !voter show they are the same, I am now recommending a redirect. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971 no Jhala Man Singh was the general of Maharan Pratap while Man Singh was a Mughal General of akbar Raged Pratihar (talk) 04:56, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971 even govt of india has published stamps on Jhala Manna
He is an important figure in indian history. Raged Pratihar (talk) 05:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Raged Pratihar Please stop posting images into the AfD discussion, it messes up the formatting. You have not addressed what the sources I quoted say, you have simply made an assertion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971 dont get confused btw Man Singh and Jhala Manna
Read this article Battle of Haldighati Jhala Man Singh is referred as Jhala Bida here. Raged Pratihar (talk) 15:14, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are not clear about this distinction, see above. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:15, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Samsun clashes (1920)

[edit]
Samsun clashes (1920) (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 doesn't seem notable, sources are not reliable or verifiable. Insanityclown1 (talk) 20:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment tr:Samsun is featured but as far as I can tell does not mention this - I have linked this discussion on that article talk page in the hope someone knows better than me. Also if the clashes with British were significant I guess one of you military experts can find an English language source Chidgk1 (talk) 06:39, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've searched and have not found anything. Insanityclown1 (talk) 15:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They have replied by pointing me to tr:Samsun_tarihi#Millî_Mücadele_sırasında but I am not competant to say which of the cites in that are reliable Chidgk1 (talk) 08:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tal Afar uprising

[edit]
Tal Afar uprising (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 doesn't seem like a notable event. There are no records cited of casualty figures or combatant numbers. The British commander isn't even noted. Not to mention, this article is written pretty poorly and with a clear nationalist slant. Insanityclown1 (talk) 20:33, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gamaji Bhangare

[edit]
Gamaji Bhangare (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)

WP:CASTE cruft bio created by IP socks of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Thakor Sumant Sinhji Jhala. First tried to hijack Gamaliel when that failed started this page through another IP hop. Gotitbro (talk) 10:22, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jurij Viditsch

[edit]
Jurij Viditsch (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)

A 17th century Slovenian mayor is hardly notable enough to keep a page here. Although he was mayor of Ljubljana, the capital city of Slovenia, which could be grounds for some notability, no sources exist which make significant mention of his life or do anything more substantial than say his name.

Here are all existing sources I could find about him:

  • [15] (which apparently consists of articles from Wikipedia according to this site here)
  • [16] (only mentions him once)

The only page on Wikipedia that even makes mention of him is List of mayors of Ljubljana. If it weren't for similarly useless pages about mayors from Ljubljana's history whose pages should be deleted alongside this one, this page would be an Orphan. Fringe, Suspect The (talk) 12:30, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per Soman
Nvss132 (talk) 11:58, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 20:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolaus von Braun

[edit]
Nicolaus von Braun (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 weird one. This guy was quartermaster of the garrison regiment of Malmo, Sweden in the early 1700s. Which seems to have been the town guard. Obviously in modern terms being a department chief in a city's police department wouldn't warrant a Wikipedia article by itself, but does it historically? I don't honestly know. The impetus for the Wikipedia article is a 30-page article in a local history yearbook, the citation for which I've cleaned up with a URL which I invite commenters to look at, especially if you speak Swedish. I doubt there are any other internet-accessible sources.

The source material is written in an academic style with citations, but many seem to be general ones for historical context, rather than ones that actually mention von Braun. He seems to only be documented in primary sources found by the chapter's writers, which in theory is fine. Their book chapter is a secondary source which Wikipedia can cite. It is likely to be the only valid source for Wikipedia on von Braun, though. Is that enough? Again, I don't honestly know. This is an AFD where I'm asking what you all think, rather than saying we definitely need to delete the article.

Reading the source through auto-translation it seems to be much more speculative than the Wikipedia article implies, with much of the information about von Braun being guesses and suppositions. It does seem like a bit of hyper-local history. In Wikipedia terms, it will probably be difficult to create meaningful inbound links (I found this article trying to create links to old orphan articles). And it's hard to imagine who's going to be getting useful information from a vague article about a city guard quartermaster from 300 years ago. I know you could make the "it's not useful..." argument for lots of Wikipedia articles, and Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia so it's fine to have articles on very obscure things, but in this case, I mean... who actually is needing this vague information about a city guard quartermaster who didn't do anything notable?

The article was created by a user who was long ago banned, with the central issue seeming to be stretching sources way too far to write content on hyper-local topics... which sounds exactly like what might be going on here right? Here2rewrite (talk) 22:58, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marko Čarapić

[edit]
Marko Čarapić (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)

6 out of the 7 citations are for Google Books, and I see no inherent notability. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I also don't follow the deletion rationale. Coverage in a few books is very respectable if the coverage is significant. Are you stating you'd prefer a mention on a website to a book?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:33, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - per Боки. Nvss132 (talk) 18:39, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Katoch–Sikh war

[edit]
Katoch–Sikh war (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)

A few unreliable sources- Ref 1) by Khazan Singh was published in 1914, and the author is not a historian. Ref 8) by Mark Brentnall is a self published source with no information available about the author. Ref 7) by Amarinder Singh, the author is a politician not a historian. In addition, refs 2) and 3) are improperly cited, do not have a page number or a proper url to a page discussing the subject at hand and thus fail WP:V. The remaining sources make only passing mention of this battle/conflicts between Sansar Chand Katoch and Ranjit Singh, and subsequently focus far more on Chand and Ranjit Singh's alliance against the Nepalis; the actual "war" content between the 2 in these books fails WP:SIGCOV by a long shot. The article's information is best suited as a prelude/context in the page Nepal-Sikh war due to the aforementioned proportionality of coverage surrounding the two's alliance. In addition, the creator of the article created numerous low quality pages to inundate Wikipedia with articles aggrandizing his religion's military history.Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 19:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Article was dePRODed by a sockpuppet who has been persistently harassing me-[20]. See [21] and [22]. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 00:12, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear opinions from editors with more experience at AFD and, ideally, with this subject area.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 16:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

[edit]
List of career achievements by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (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)

Similar to other articles in the Career achievements of basketball players category, this is a collection of indiscriminate trivia with trivial statistical cross sections, which is a violation of WP:NOTSTATS and does not meet the notability criteria under WP:NLIST. The most pertinent info is already included in the main article. Let'srun (talk) 00:58, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep unless there's a solid reason to delete it beyond being statistics-heavy. Kareem is one of the sport's greatest players, something which has drawn extremely extensive commentary, so I don't think this is really indiscriminate.
jp×g🗯️ 21:00, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Right now, there is no consensus. Let's see if a relisting helps.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Colons_and_asterisks#Best_practices says to use things like ":::" or "***", not a mixture. If the reply tool is doing something else, then it's faulty in a minor way. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2024 (UTC) [reply]
There's a mixed example there showing *****: sixth reply.—Bagumba (talk) 22:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History Proposed deletions

[edit]

History categories

[edit]

for occasional archiving

Proposals

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/History&oldid=1239578586"