Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/History
Points of interest related to History on Wikipedia: Outline – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment |
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:
- 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.
- 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.
watch |
History
edit- Sharan Kaur Pabla (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)
"Sharan Kaur" was a fictional character created by the author Vir Singh in a fictional novel. There are literally no reliable sources to support that "Sharan Kaur" was an actual historical figure. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 07:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:GNG. Even disregarding the inaccuracies, this article has only one source supporting it. A Google search found some websites which support his existence, such as this one, but this website is far from noteworthy coverage nor is it a reliable source. Even the most popular result, from SikhiWiki, cites Wikipedia as a reference, making it unusable. Jordano53 07:54, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, Sikhism, and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- U.S. automobile production figures (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:NOTSTATS with no inline citations and mostly essay content in the lead, and arbitrarily cut off at 2000. WP:SYNTH may also be a concern because the sources used might have different methodologies for estimating production in a given model year. PROD contested because:
Objecting to deletion, there are citations, and this information doesn't appear available elsewhere on Wikipedia and it provides valuable information, I'm not sure why this should be deleted
— User:97.176.15.217 22:41, 31 October 2024
But "valuable information" and "not available elsewhere" are not valid justifications for collections of data, especially a year-by-year breakdown over an entire century that does not include all companies. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Business, Transportation, Lists, and United States of America. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Waddles 🗩 🖉 02:17, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. This is a relic of an earlier era that would be more useful as tabular data on Commons. After 19 years, it's only linked to by 3 articles - two of them as improper circular references rather than useful wikilinks. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:41, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NOTSTATS and nom. I am sure someone else has collected these figures before but it won't have the significant coverage to sustain such a list. Conyo14 (talk) 04:55, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The news media does cover which are the bestselling vehicles of the year. Google news search for bestselling vehicles in America and each year, finds some results in reliable sources giving significant coverage to this. We have articles for List of best-selling automobiles and List of automobile sales by model. List of countries by motor vehicle production exist as well. This list just shows how many vehicles were made in America by each company year by year. Does production per country get coverage, or just global sales? Dream Focus 07:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wouldn't that just be WP:SYNTH issues? In which case I would argue just for a redirect to the automobile sales by model list as a potential target. Conyo14 (talk) 08:23, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Rizvan Huseynov (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 fails to meet WP:GNG as it lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources and for a biographical article, it does not adhere to WP:BIO and failing WP:V. The article's tone seems like WP:PROMO. Nxcrypto Message 19:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, History, and Azerbaijan. Nxcrypto Message 19:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Examples of feudalism (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 seems to be a WP:CONTENTFORK of feudalism, with seemlingly randomly chosen case studies (WP:INDISCRIMIANTE), haphazardly grouped (particularly considering the weirdly named section "Modern traces" which seems to be "random stuff that did not fit into the two other sections"). There is no need for such an article to exist; at best it can be redirected/merged to the parent article (WP:ATD-R, WP:ATD-M). The main article on feudalism is actually not too long, and is missing a 'by country' overview, which seems to be the way this organized, so merge might be best. If kept as a separate article (but why?), this needs to be renamed, although I am not sure how (Feudalism by country?). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:49, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- I was somewhat astonished upon checking the revision history statistics to find myself top editor by character count, despite having edited only one section over the summer (and probably due to the citations I added). This article already seems like it was split off from Feudalism as a daughter article, which I think it sort of might have been?I think the main problem here (this topic) is that feudalism is a term with a specific technical meaning, but its meaning has been broadened over the years to apply to a number of systems of territorial administration that are not technically feudal, but where the feudalism label can act as a useful heuristic. The main article doesn't do a great job differentiating what feudalism ism and isn'tm, and the article under discussion here serves that purpose, as well as hosting a bunch of hatnotes that would probably otherwise end up in a list article somewhere or in Feudalism#See also.I'm not 100% on straight merging into Feudalism: I think the examples of legit, consensus feudal societies could be worked into the main article, but without counterexamples of not-quite-feudal societies (which don't really belong in the main article), it will act as a magnet for that stuff. I'm real big on the concept of excellent list articles (like Infrastructure of the Brill Tramway), which I propose at every major notability discussion about our surfeit of microstubs (like WP:LUGSTUBS et seq.), and this article has the potential to become a great list article. It almost is, except for the title and structure. I also recognise I absolutely will not have the time to restructure it into an excellent list article unless this discussion is relisted at least four times. So I could see any of the following actions: retitle, partial merge, complete merge, temporary redirect until it can be sorted out, or keep.For now, Folly Mox (talk) 15:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Muslim migrations to Ottoman Palestine (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 started by Icewhiz sock. Article is taken straight from Zionist propaganda: Palestinians are "recent" immigrants to Israel/Palestine, when Jewish immigration was far larger Huldra (talk) 23:53, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Israel and Palestine. Huldra (talk) 23:53, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:01, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep if there is a POV bias in this page, that should be resolved by editing. If the topic is notable, which it appears to be, that wouldn't be a valid deletion rationale. Has sources, and ineligible for G5 since other contributions were made after the sock. Andre🚐 00:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Both the Arab migrations to the Levant page and this page are pretty long, so I'm not sure if a merge is the best route. I could see there being a page about each of the major periods of migration. It doesn't seem like this topic is currently covered in the former page though. I'm going to remain at Keep for now and not Merge even though I can understand the argument to Merge. Andre🚐 23:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. "Article is Zionist propaganda" is not a valid deletion argument. Specifically, according to WP:SKCRIT, this is a nomination that is
clearly an attempt to end an editing dispute through deletion, where dispute resolution is a more appropriate course
. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 00:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)- While I agree their wording is unnecessarily combative, WP:G5 is still a valid reason to bring this here & I'm unsure how it could be considered an "attempt to end an editing dispute." Who is the editing dispute between? Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 01:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Butterscotch Beluga: As Andre said, the page has substantial edits from one other person and doesn't qualify for G5. The editing dispute is that Huldra is unhappy with the article's content. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 01:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- While I agree their wording is unnecessarily combative, WP:G5 is still a valid reason to bring this here & I'm unsure how it could be considered an "attempt to end an editing dispute." Who is the editing dispute between? Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 01:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or Merge to Demographic history of Palestine (region). I don't think the wording of this proposal was necessary, but regardless, outside of being mostly written by a blocked sock, this article feels like undetailed retreading of already existing articles. It relies too much on the writings of 1 author, David Grossman, with 5/16 sources written by him + as far as I can tell online, he also had a hand in Zvi Ilan's 'Turkmens, Circassians, and Bosnians in Northern Sharon", though I could be misreading that. It also contains content unrelated to the topic such as Druze communities & settlement to areas that weren't a part of Ottoman Palestine like Damascus, Ajloun, and the Hauran. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 01:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Butterscotch Beluga: What about merging with Arab migrations to the Levant? Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 01:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- That'd actually be better. I had originally proposed Demographic history of Palestine (region) because I thought it was also being merged with Arab migrations to the Levant, but I now see that proposal isn't gaining traction. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 01:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Butterscotch Beluga: What about merging with Arab migrations to the Levant? Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 01:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge to Arab migrations to the Levant. There was nothing special about Palestine in the Ottoman period as far as Muslim population movements were concerned. The I-P conflict is the only reason for the focus on Palestine, and that focus creates the misleading impression that Palestine was special when it wasn't. This article also fails to give a balanced account as there is no attempt to place migrations in context or weigh their significance relative to the existing population. Zerotalk 08:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge The content could be suitably added to Arab migrations to the Levant or Demographic history of Palestine (region). Richard Nevell (talk) 17:14, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Origin theories of Adolf Hitler (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)
Some articles are walled gardens.This is more like a walled cesspit, a POV fork that can only survive in isolation. Qwirkle (talk) 07:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Austria. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 08:20, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Hitler family, which has already dealt with the same issues, and is a "See also" link at the top of the Ancestry section. — Maile (talk) 01:56, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I suppose it could be a redirect but a search on "origin theories of..." isn't very likely. The topic is covered in Hitler family. Lamona (talk) 03:26, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- 2030 in sports (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)
Declined PROD. Page was created too soon. List is completely unsourced and contains only one single entry. Almost eligible for speedy deletion under criterion A3. CycloneYoris talk! 00:46, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CycloneYoris talk! 00:46, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, it's not even a complete list and way too soon. I agree this could be speedy deleted. Esolo5002 (talk) 05:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep – I added events from Category:2030 in sports, which brought it up to eight entries. At the very least it's definitely not eligible for speedy deletion anymore. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:45, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Lorstaking (talk) 07:28, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:TOOSOON. Procyon117 (talk) 08:00, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Absolutely WP:TOOSOON. This page won't have use for at least another couple of years. Beachweak (talk) 12:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. We should stamp out the perceived need to create articles more than half a decade ahead of its time. Wikipedia does not hold a contest for fastest creation of articles. More articles on future or even current events need to develop in draft space first, that what is the case today. Geschichte (talk) 12:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Keep and draft: Articles will be needed in the future, it can be moved to draft space where it can develop until a point it is suitable for the main space. Mn1548 (talk) 09:43, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Mn1548: Drafts can only be stored for up to six months, according to WP:DRAFT, so sending this to draft space makes absolutely no sense. Considering that there isn't any content worth preserving, and the page can be easily recreated in the future. CycloneYoris talk! 06:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- That is a fair point. On second thoughts, my usual objections to deleteing articles that will be notable in the future regarding keeping the article as a source library doesn't apply in this case as such sources will be more available closer to the time for this article. A preference for draft is still here, but no objection to deletion. Mn1548 (talk) 14:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Mn1548: Drafts can only be stored for up to six months, according to WP:DRAFT, so sending this to draft space makes absolutely no sense. Considering that there isn't any content worth preserving, and the page can be easily recreated in the future. CycloneYoris talk! 06:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Boston Common and Public Garden (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)
We already have articles for the separate entities Boston Public Garden and Boston Common. There is no purpose to this duplicative article. Although the Garden and Common were listed on the National Register of Historic Places together (before being superseded by more appropriate separate listings later), an NRHP listing itself is not notable, rather the places it designates are notable, and they already have articles. The original author User:Doncram, who made articles for thousands of NRHP listings, even redirected it the day after making it with the note "'Boston Common and Public Garden' was the name given to the combination of the Boston Common and the Boston Public Garden when they were listed as a single entry on the National Register of Historic Places in 1972, with refnum 72000144. In 1987, the two were listed on the Register separately. It seems not helpful to have an article on the arbitrary combination of the two. Please see, instead, the individual articles for Boston Common and Boston Public Garden."
While I had redirected the page to National Register of Historic Places listings in northern Boston because neither individual site was a better target (Doncram originally pointed it to Boston Common), a redirect is likely not necessary either. This is an unlikely search/navigation target since these are separate entities that already have their own articles that link to each other with full histories, and replicating information in a third page just because they previously had a simultaneous historical designation is completely unnecessary. Reywas92Talk 22:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, United States of America, and Massachusetts. Reywas92Talk 22:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to National Register of Historic Places listings in northern Boston. I agree that an article on this is totally unnecessary, as it's a listing covering two already-notable parks, and the listing is not in itself notable. However, a redirect can still help with navigation, especially for people who are specifically looking for the NRHP listing. (As far as I can tell, this listing is still on the National Register, but there are additional, separate NHL district listings for both parks, which are overlaid onto this listing.) – Epicgenius (talk) 22:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Firstly, long-standing consensus that heritage listings are notable. Secondly, there are plenty of district listings that include individually listed items. The question is, what makes this district distinctive for historic reasons? It is the combination, which is what the article is about. Not one; not the other; but how the relate to each other over time. Rather than deleting it, elaborating on the relationship between the entities is the proper thing to do. Magic♪piano 01:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Incorrect, there's a long-standing consensus that places listed on heritage listings are notable, not that the listing as a concept itself is or must have a separate page. Absolutely the Common and Garden are notable, but the fact that they were listed together doesn't make that listing a notable entity. Many listed districts do cover a whole neighborhood that includes multiple individual places, or may delineate a new place in a way that justifies its own entry, but those often also include dozens of contributing and non-contributing items, and it's still the place(s) that's notable, not the listing. Unlike for such districts (whose articles should never just be duplicative like for a neighborhood and a district spanning it), here there are just two specific places, and both articles already have history sections that describe their relationships. Those can be expanded, sure, but it doesn't need a redundant page that few will read and most will wonder why exists. Reywas92Talk 02:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- "there's a long-standing consensus that places listed on heritage listings are notable" vs. "the fact that they were listed together doesn't make that listing a notable entity". Well, which is it? Either a listing is notable or it isn't. Magic♪piano 22:26, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- (a) "because neither individual site was a better target" vs. (b) "both articles already have history sections that describe their relationships". If (a) is true, why not improve one or the other, and then propose a redirect to that place? If (b), well, why not propose a redirect rather than starting a confrontational process like AfD. In either case, there is no reason to delete the article NOW. If for no other reason, it provides a linking point from the NRHP list on which it appears until such a time as a more suitable redirect can be erected. Magic♪piano 22:50, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Urartian 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)
WP:EXTENDED might be required due to Wikipedia:General sanctions/Armenia and Azerbaijan. Article creator does not have extended confirmed status.
Potentially WP:FRINGE sources. For example, with respect to this claim According to the migration-mixed hypothesis of Armeni ethnogenesis proposed by I. M. Diakonov, the Urartians, along with the Hurrians and Luwians[2], gradually adopted the Indo-European, Proto-Armenian language
.
In The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Anatolia: (10,000-323 BCE), pp. 537-538:
According to one theory, the self-designation of the Armenians, hay , goes back to the earlier * hātiyos, “Hittite.” This is conceivable only on the assumption that masses of Proto-Armenians settled in one of the Neo-Hittite states, perhaps Melid (Diakonoff 1984 :125–27).
From self-designation to what is mentioned above is quite a jump.
Also uses massively outdated sources such as belonged to the Armenoid race of populations
, which cites a source from 1957 Bogazicili (talk) 17:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- I was also reviewing the page at the same time, and was about to remove that last claim. We don't do "scientific racism" here.More to the point, the topic of Urartian people (as in, the Urartian-speaking ethnic group, partially overlapping with but distinct from the population of Urartu) is very likely notable, but holy crap that article needs a rewrite. It is not clear whether WP:EXTENDED automatically applies (as the article might fall under the second point rather than the first), so my first choice would be keep, but rewrite to at least remove the WP:FRINGE material. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:16, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pretty much all the sources seem fringe though. The earlier "theory" has a source from 1983. I didn't even read what's in the link, since my browser is giving a security warning for that page. There are no high quality WP:Secondary sources. No peer reviewed journal articles. Bogazicili (talk) 17:22, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- An article about Urartians or Urartian people is missing in English-language Wikipedia. But it needs to be written WP:RS. Wikipedia:Competence is required might also be relevant here. Bogazicili (talk) 17:17, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, History, and Armenia. Shellwood (talk) 17:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Shellwood, why wasn't it listed under Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Turkey?? Bogazicili (talk) 13:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Keep - article sufficiently demonstrates WP:N. Archives908 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but potentially keep it seni-protected. Bearian (talk) 11:36, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I did a major clean-up, I don't think its as problematic now. The article can be improved with this chapter, accessible through Wikipedia Library. Bogazicili (talk) 14:18, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Don’t judge too harshly, I took the information for the article mostly from the Russian Wikipedia. Marquis2425 (talk) 15:21, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- I also took the sources from there, their information and sources were outdated. I never intended to harm Wikipedia or violate the rules. Marquis2425 (talk) 15:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This does seem to require extended confirmed status. See: Administrators noticeboard topic. Bogazicili (talk) 15:47, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- So, I can’t write until I have an extended verified status? Marquis2425 (talk) 19:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- You can, just not about some (not all) Wikipedia:Contentious topics, most notably Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Armenia-Azerbaijan and Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- So, I can’t write until I have an extended verified status? Marquis2425 (talk) 19:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Southern Illinois tornado history (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:NOTDATABASE. EF5 16:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Illinois. EF5 16:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of Illinois tornadoes. This is a list, not an article on tornado history in southern Illinois. I'm interested in expanding the tornado history of Northern Illinois, which I find much more interesting, but this is better done creating standalone articles including on individual tornadoes, outbreaks, and "Tornadoes of YYYY" expansions. Departure– (talk) 16:57, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Environment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of Illinois tornadoes. Azuredivay (talk) 13:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Battle of Pangal (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)
Contested BLAR so bringing it to AfD with a proposal for a consensus redirect to Deccani–Vijayanagar_wars#Qutb_Shahi-Vijayanagara_conflicts. I don't see sufficient WP:SIGCOV of this event in reliable, independent sources for a standalone page per WP:GNG. The sources are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS (paragraph or less in full-length books) of this battle. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:06, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Telangana. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:06, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: The only two sources that provide a few lines (not more than five to even consider a redirect) of coverage are dubious, as one was authored by an Indian civil servant of the British administration and first published in 1900, which falls under WP:RAJ, while the other was first published in 1927. This may explain why the event has not received attention in recent academic works. I would not support the proposal for a redirect unless there is sufficient coverage from reliable sources. Garuda Talk! 17:32, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- WP:RAJ is an essay. Can you explain why removed a source, using the justification that it was a self-published source when it is clearly listed as being originally published by the University of Michigan? TarnishedPathtalk 01:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not the person you asked the question to, but Google Books upload data doesn't claim Michigan published it; it says "original from". (My guess, Google digitized the copy of the book held by Michigan's library) This HathiTrust index shows that Michigan is a library where the volume can be found, not that the University of Michigan Press was the publisher. All other listings are clear that the book was published by the K. Chandraiah Memorial Trust, and considering that K. Chandraiah was the author, that's a WP:SPS. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:44, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- No that's not what a WP:SPS is. Conflating a memorial trust with the individual that is being memorialised is a misunderstanding of what a trust is. A trust is not an individual. The only way that it might be considered a WP:SPS is if the individual (K. Chandraiah) was the trustee of the trust and the fact that it's a memorial trust suggests that is impossible unless you believe in resurrection. The fact that the book is held by Michigan library also weighs against the argument of it being a SPS. TarnishedPathtalk 03:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Massive U.S. university libraries hold all kinds of nonsense books, believe me. And who on earth is publishing it as "the K. Chandraiah Memorial Trust" if not Chandraiah or his heirs? And if heirs are publishing their ancestor's work, that's still fundamentally self-published. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Do you understand what a memorial trust is? TarnishedPathtalk 09:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Massive U.S. university libraries hold all kinds of nonsense books, believe me. And who on earth is publishing it as "the K. Chandraiah Memorial Trust" if not Chandraiah or his heirs? And if heirs are publishing their ancestor's work, that's still fundamentally self-published. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- No that's not what a WP:SPS is. Conflating a memorial trust with the individual that is being memorialised is a misunderstanding of what a trust is. A trust is not an individual. The only way that it might be considered a WP:SPS is if the individual (K. Chandraiah) was the trustee of the trust and the fact that it's a memorial trust suggests that is impossible unless you believe in resurrection. The fact that the book is held by Michigan library also weighs against the argument of it being a SPS. TarnishedPathtalk 03:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- @TarnishedPath Explantion is given right their in the edit summary, self published sources are generally not reliable unless ofcourse it is published by a renowned author. Garuda Talk! 08:53, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- PS: RAJ is indeed an essay however a book published by a British administrative officer should be used with caution. The claim that the Michigan library contains the book and therefore it must be reliable is not a valid argument. For instance, I raised a similar point in the RSN discussion (see below comment), where I pointed out the book is housed in Osmania University’s library but that does not make it reliable. Garuda Talk! 09:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- A book published by a memorial trust is not a book published by the very person that the trust is memorialising. Do you understand what a trust is? TarnishedPathtalk 09:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- That does not make sense. How could a memorial trust be named after the very author? Please seek RSN for your queries. Garuda Talk! 10:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- A memorial trust, is a charitable fund established to honour the memory of someone who has passed away. Clearly someone who has passed away isn't publishing anything. Addressing Dclemens1971's comment above memorial trusts don't necessarily have the deceased's family/ancestors as trustee/s of the trust estate. The trustee/s can often be accountants/lawyers or other professionals who were involved in setting up the trust. It is the trustee/s who run the trust at their discretion in accordance with the trust deed. I've not seen any good argument put forward as to why the source is a self-published source. TarnishedPathtalk 02:47, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- The people who publish material via a memorial trust (as opposed to a legitimate publisher) are fans, associates, or relatives of the deceased. That’s why it’s functionally self-published. There’s no evidence or guarantee of the independent editorial evaluation of a publishing house. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- A memorial trust, is a charitable fund established to honour the memory of someone who has passed away. Clearly someone who has passed away isn't publishing anything. Addressing Dclemens1971's comment above memorial trusts don't necessarily have the deceased's family/ancestors as trustee/s of the trust estate. The trustee/s can often be accountants/lawyers or other professionals who were involved in setting up the trust. It is the trustee/s who run the trust at their discretion in accordance with the trust deed. I've not seen any good argument put forward as to why the source is a self-published source. TarnishedPathtalk 02:47, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- That does not make sense. How could a memorial trust be named after the very author? Please seek RSN for your queries. Garuda Talk! 10:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- A book published by a memorial trust is not a book published by the very person that the trust is memorialising. Do you understand what a trust is? TarnishedPathtalk 09:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- PS: RAJ is indeed an essay however a book published by a British administrative officer should be used with caution. The claim that the Michigan library contains the book and therefore it must be reliable is not a valid argument. For instance, I raised a similar point in the RSN discussion (see below comment), where I pointed out the book is housed in Osmania University’s library but that does not make it reliable. Garuda Talk! 09:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not the person you asked the question to, but Google Books upload data doesn't claim Michigan published it; it says "original from". (My guess, Google digitized the copy of the book held by Michigan's library) This HathiTrust index shows that Michigan is a library where the volume can be found, not that the University of Michigan Press was the publisher. All other listings are clear that the book was published by the K. Chandraiah Memorial Trust, and considering that K. Chandraiah was the author, that's a WP:SPS. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:44, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- WP:RAJ is an essay. Can you explain why removed a source, using the justification that it was a self-published source when it is clearly listed as being originally published by the University of Michigan? TarnishedPathtalk 01:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: For this source, which has some coverage but is still regarded as dubious, see this discussion. Garuda Talk! 19:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect : The fort was captured and lost multiple times, should not have a specific page. Can be redirected to Deccani–Vijayanagar wars#Qutb Shahi-Vijayanagara conflicts. PerspicazHistorian (talk) 05:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Boyd's Eurobin Hotel (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 and WP:NHIST due to lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Relies on local accounts and primary materials, with no in-depth analysis, making it non-notable per WP:RS. Primarily of regional interest without broader historical significance. Nxcrypto Message 11:10, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Australia. Nxcrypto Message 11:10, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Dear Wikipedia Editors,
- Thank you for reviewing the page for Boyd's Eurobin Hotel. I would like to provide additional context and justification for why this page should remain on Wikipedia. Below are several points addressing the concerns cited in the deletion proposal:
- 1. Historical Significance to the Region
- Boyd's Eurobin Hotel is historically significant as one of the key social and logistical hubs in northeastern Victoria during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It served as:
- A halfway stop for travellers between the important regional centres of Myrtleford and Bright, contributing to the region’s transportation and economic development during the coaching era.
- A gathering place for political events, community meetings, and significant public addresses, as documented in multiple historical articles from the Ovens and Murray Advertiser.
- While the hotel itself no longer exists, its historical role provides insights into the development of regional Victoria during a formative period, which aligns with the purpose of Wikipedia to preserve knowledge, particularly for places that have evolved significantly or no longer exist in their original form.
- 2. Reliable Sources and References
- The article is based entirely on reliable, independent secondary sources, specifically reputable newspapers from the time such as:
- The Ovens and Murray Advertiser, a well-regarded regional publication that extensively documented events, businesses, and social life in the area.
- The Yackandandah Times and The Age, providing corroborating accounts of the hotel's role in the local economy and its broader community impact.
- These are historical records, which, by their nature, provide the most comprehensive and legitimate sources of information about a hotel from the 19th century. Dismissing these sources as merely "local accounts" underestimates their value as the principal historical records of the time.
- 3. Importance of Preserving Regional History
- The page contributes to the documentation of Victoria’s regional history, complementing related pages on Eurobin, St. Clement's Church Eurobin, and the Eurobin Presbyterian Church. Together, these articles create a cohesive narrative about a once-thriving hamlet. Removing this page would leave a significant gap in understanding Eurobin’s history.
- Wikipedia is often the first and only resource for regional and niche history. Deleting this page would undermine the platform’s role as a repository for diverse historical content, especially for subjects that are less well-known but still meaningful to specific regions or communities.
- 4. Meets Wikipedia’s Notability Guidelines for History
- The article satisfies WP:NHIST by:
- Establishing the hotel’s role in regional historical events, such as being a venue for political campaigns, community gatherings, and a recovery site for injured travellers.
- Providing multiple, independent sources that verify the hotel's importance in its historical context.
- While the subject might not have broad national or global appeal, Wikipedia policies allow for regional notability. Boyd’s Eurobin Hotel represents a significant chapter in the development of northeastern Victoria, a region rich in history but underrepresented on the platform.
- 5. Broader Educational Value
- The page serves as an example of how small, local institutions contributed to the larger social and economic fabric of Australia during the 19th century. It adds depth to the broader historical understanding of transportation, community hubs, and rural development in Victoria.
- Conclusion
- I respectfully request that the page be retained, as it:
- Is thoroughly referenced with reliable secondary sources.
- Provides significant historical value to the Eurobin area and northeastern Victoria.
- Contributes to a richer understanding of Australia’s regional history.
- I am happy to address any specific points of concern and welcome suggestions for improving the page further to meet Wikipedia’s standards.
- Sincerely,
- blackcatsx Blackcatsx (talk) 14:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Your response appears to be Al-generated. Nxcrypto Message 02:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- First, are any of the sources used available online and if so can you please link them? It's unclear if any of this news coverage is substantial coverage. One of the sources is "Found: A young boar pig" and another is just "Accident", so these seem to be local news briefs, not deeper substance. If the hotel is historically significant to warrant an article, I would expect retrospective histories to provide coverage, not only contemporary news articles. You say this region is "underrepresented on the platform", but it appears that's because it's underrepresented in history books, and WP:PRIMARY sources are insufficient for an article here. To be clear, being "a recovery site for injured travellers" or a venue for "community gatherings" is not a basis for notability, there are a billion such places. You say "venue for political campaigns" with plural, yet only a single event by a non-notable candidate is mentioned – There's a lot of candidates who go a lot of places but that doesn't make them notable! The owner being a secretary for a church either – not necessarily an "integral role" for even the community, much less the "region", as claimed – is irrelevant to the hotel's claim to notability, especially if only being your claim based on his archived letters rather than a historian saying so. "The property is often mentioned in the context of the town's historical significance" really couches the fact that the town generally is what's notable, not a hotel there – Eurobin#History would be a better place for this. "The establishment was a hub of activity, reflecting its importance within the Eurobin community" is not sourced. "A recurring theme in historical records" would be WP:Original research – you reviewed the records, not a historian in a published source. Besides that this section has just one source that doesn't support "recurring" or "articles", why would anyone now care that the hotel had an employee who did her job? "Its role as a community hub, coaching stop, and post office has left an indelible mark on the history of Eurobin." If it's so indelible, why aren't there any more modern sources that say so? "Today, Boyd's Eurobin Hotel exists only in historical records and memories." I think anyone with memories of it is dead now. Reywas92Talk 15:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I read every source and not a single one of them is more than the barest passing mention. All are brief news blurbs about local goings-on, none provide the slightest amount of depth about the hotel. None allow you to make conclusions that it was a historically significant place – rather, just a place that existed in the past, nothing more than a generic business in a small town, undistinguished from any other hotel. The AI-generated wording below of "highlight", "provides insight", "underscores", and even "details" are all exaggerations. Today's additions are even worse: "This integration of hospitality and postal services highlights the hotel's broader contribution beyond providing accommodation, acting as a key logistical and social hub for the surrounding area during an era when reliable postal services and coaching stops were vital lifelines for rural communities." "Boyd's hospitality ensured that such incidents were handled with care." Post offices are not notable (every town has one, often in a general store or inn), and the AI-written conclusions like being a "logistical hub" are absurd. Reywas92Talk 15:49, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: The equivalent of a telephone book listing [1] is about all I found for sourcing. Based on the long explanation above, this could potentially be notable, but we need sourcing with links to the documents if possible. I just don't see notability at this time. Oaktree b (talk) 16:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your detailed feedback regarding the article on Boyd’s Eurobin Hotel. I have carefully reviewed your comments and have made several updates to the article to address the issues raised. Below are my responses to the specific points mentioned:
- 1. Availability and Credibility of Sources
- All references now include direct links to digitised articles from the National Library of Australia’s Trove database. These sources are archived and verifiable primary accounts from reputable publications such as the Ovens and Murray Advertiser and The Age. While they may be contemporary, they offer detailed and factual accounts of the hotel's significance during its operational years. These sources are widely recognised as credible in documenting regional history.
- 2. Significance of the Hotel
- The hotel was not simply a "recovery site" or a venue for "community gatherings." Its role as a halfway house on a major coaching route between Myrtleford and Bright made it an integral part of regional transportation and commerce in the late 19th century.
- The site was significant enough to remain a known landmark after its closure, as demonstrated by its use as a turning point in the 1898 Federal Cycling Club road race. This reflects its continued relevance to the community even after ceasing operations.
- 3. Historical Context
- It is essential to preserve records of local establishments like Boyd’s Hotel as part of a broader effort to document regional history. Many small towns and hamlets, such as Eurobin, played vital roles in shaping the rural economy and culture of Victoria. Articles like this help ensure that these contributions are not forgotten.
- The lack of retrospective histories on the hotel does not diminish its historical significance. Instead, it highlights the need to preserve primary records to prevent erasure of smaller, regionally significant sites.
- 4. Community and Cultural Impact
- John Boyd’s dual role as hotel proprietor and community leader (e.g., secretary of the Presbyterian Church) underscores the interconnected nature of rural establishments and their communities. The hotel was more than a business; it was a hub for social, political, and religious activities. The records of his contributions provide a valuable lens into Eurobin’s societal structure during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
- The hotel’s association with the post office further cements its role as a focal point of regional connectivity and communication.
- 5. Claims of Notability
- The article does not rely on claims of "indelible marks" or "recurring themes" without evidence. These phrases have been adjusted or removed to align with Wikipedia's standards.
- While the candidate Richard Warren may not have been notable, the mention of his campaign stop illustrates the hotel's importance as a gathering place during its time.
- The article does not assert that individual roles (e.g., "Maid of the Inn") are historically significant on their own. Instead, these anecdotes enrich the narrative by providing a glimpse into daily life at the hotel, which adds depth and context.
- 6. Broader Historical Significance
- The town of Eurobin is underrepresented on Wikipedia, and documenting sites like Boyd’s Hotel contributes to the historical tapestry of the region. While it may not hold national or international significance, its role in regional history makes it a valuable addition to the platform. Wikipedia is not solely a repository for globally significant subjects; it is also a place to preserve local and cultural histories that might otherwise be lost.
- 7. Modern Sources
- You raise a valid point regarding the lack of retrospective analysis. However, this is precisely why articles like this are crucial. Without documentation, small yet significant historical sites risk fading into obscurity. Inclusion on Wikipedia can encourage further research and scholarship on such topics.
- Conclusion I believe the article now meets Wikipedia’s guidelines for notability, with all sources properly cited and linked. Boyd’s Eurobin Hotel played an essential role in its community, and preserving its history aligns with Wikipedia's mission to provide a comprehensive and inclusive record of human knowledge. I kindly request that the updated version of the article be considered before a final decision is made.
- Thank you for your time and for the opportunity to improve this entry.
- Sincerely,
- Blackcatsx Blackcatsx (talk) 02:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Regarding "Thank you for your time". A bigger token of respect towards our time would be to not use AI to write very long-winded replies. Is that just a suspicion or did you use tools of that nature? Geschichte (talk) 19:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Geschicte
- I wrote the response myself but asked AI to tidy up up for me. The reason I did this is because I have Parkinson's disease and a significant tremor makes it hard for me to type as I once did. I find the best way to tackle my physical limitations and yet still communicate is to use voice to text. Invariably, it makes stupid punctuation and syntax errors. AI helps me to combat this problem. I apologise if I have broken some rule by doing this but the words are mine. I am genuine about trying to fix the page so that it is up to standard and have worked very hard to try and do this...
- Sincerely
- Blackcatsx Blackcatsx (talk) 03:12, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Regarding "Thank you for your time". A bigger token of respect towards our time would be to not use AI to write very long-winded replies. Is that just a suspicion or did you use tools of that nature? Geschichte (talk) 19:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Blackcatsx (talk · contribs), would you provide a summary of the best sources (please list between two and five sources and a summary of how each covers the hotel)? (If the sources are in the public domain, you can even quote the entire source in this discussion.) These sources must be reliable sources that are independent of the hotel. The best sources must provide significant coverage of the hotel. Thank you. Cunard (talk) 09:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your patience and for giving me the opportunity to clarify the sources supporting the Boyd's Eurobin Hotel article. Below are the strongest sources that provide significant and independent coverage:
- "Old Pioneer Passes – Mr. John Boyd" (Yackandandah Times, 2 June 1921)
- This retrospective obituary details John Boyd's contributions to the Eurobin community, specifically his role as the long-standing landlord of the Eurobin Hotel from 1870 to 1890.
- It highlights his central role in establishing the hotel as a vital stop in the region and discusses the historical context of its operations.
- Read the full article here.
- "The Ovens District Election" (Ovens and Murray Advertiser, 17 February 1880)
- This article documents a political event hosted at the Eurobin Hotel, where candidate Richard Warren addressed voters.
- It provides insight into the hotel's role as a community gathering place and venue for regional political activity.
- Read the full article here.
- "Picturesque Victoria" (Ovens and Murray Advertiser, 21 August 1884)
- This piece highlights the Eurobin Hotel’s dual role as both a public house and post office.
- It describes the logistical importance of the hotel along the coaching route, including details about the daughter of the house managing horses and mail deliveries.
- Read the full article here.
- "Accident" (Ovens and Murray Advertiser, 18 November 1881)
- This report details the Eurobin Hotel serving as a recovery site for an injured traveller, demonstrating its role as more than just a hospitality venue but also a place of refuge in emergencies.
- Read the full article here.
- "Bright" (Ovens and Murray Advertiser, 5 November 1898)
- This article describes a 20-mile road race organised by the Federal Cycling Club of Bright, with the turning point designated at the site of Boyd's Eurobin Hotel.
- It underscores the hotel's continued recognition as a local landmark even after its closure.
- Read the full article here.
- "Old Pioneer Passes – Mr. John Boyd" (Yackandandah Times, 2 June 1921)
- ----
- Historical Context and Source Availability
- It’s worth noting that the Boyd's Eurobin Hotel existed in an era when local newspapers were the primary record-keepers for regional events. Comprehensive historical analyses or in-depth retrospectives about establishments like this were rarely conducted at the time. The sources provided reflect the kind of significant coverage one could reasonably expect from the late 19th century. Given the passage of time and the natural loss of many historical records, these surviving accounts are, in themselves, rare and valuable windows into the social, political, and logistical role the hotel played in the Eurobin community.
- I hope this summary clarifies the strength and significance of the sources supporting the article. I remain committed to refining the page to meet Wikipedia’s standards and am open to further feedback.
- Thank you again for your time and consideration.
- Best regards,
- Blackcatsx Blackcatsx (talk) 10:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your patience and for giving me the opportunity to clarify the sources supporting the Boyd's Eurobin Hotel article. Below are the strongest sources that provide significant and independent coverage:
- Thank you for these summaries. The first article provides two sentences of coverage about the hotel. It says, "In July 1870, he became landlord of the Eurobin hotel, which was known in the old coaching days as the half-way house between Bright and Myrtleford. For 20 years he presided over that then well-known hostelry." This is not significant coverage of the hotel. Based on your description, the other sources mention the hotel in passing but do not "addres[s] the topic directly and in detail" as required by the notability guideline. Are there any other sources that provide at least two or three paragraphs of coverage about the hotel? I'm not seeing enough to meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline at the moment. Cunard (talk) 10:55, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Cunard and other editors,
- Historical journalism from 19th-century rural Australia was naturally brief, anecdotal, and fragmented, especially compared to today's reporting. Eurobin is still considered regional today, being 15 km from the nearest small town, but back in the late 19th century, it was seriously remote - it took more than half a day to travel from the nearest town to it.
- With respect, expecting extensive feature articles of two or three paragraphs (or more) is unrealistic for a hotel within a village of this size. I have read a couple of peer-reviewed articles around this subject, but nothing gets the point across quite as well as actually reading these old, 19th-century Australian regional newspapers. The style was vastly different from journalism today. Resources were limited, distribution was a challenge, and Australia is a uniquely vast and sparsely populated country in that regard.
- In reporting, priority was given to local events, announcements, and practical information. In-depth feature articles were extremely rare. I could provide examples, but I’m getting the sense that a decision has already been made by Wikipedia editors? If I’m right about this, please just let me know.
- There’s a saying in Australia - perhaps a little crude but meant in the best possible spirit: "I’m not here to f&%k spiders!"
- I have no particular connection to Boyd's Eurobin Hotel, nor to any of the people who lived or associated with it. I’ve been fortunate to live in this area for the past four years and have noticed, as many others (Eurobin is en route to one of the larger tourist areas in this state -the town of Bright) have, a dearth of information on local history.
- There are several informal Facebook groups where various discussions take place on snippets of history, as well as two historical societies. However, it struck me that Wikipedia was the ideal place to showcase a piece of history such as Boyd's Eurobin Hotel because it is easily accessible, allows new (old) information to be added if and when it is found, and helps build a collective picture of the pioneers of the area.
- Many descendants of families like the Boyds are still living - some even in the local area - and history such as this delights them. I mention this simply to say that I am not attempting, in any way, to waste anybody's time or break any rules. This just seemed the best way to share some historical information, which I have spent a great many hours researching.
- It’s clear to me, from the time I’ve spent researching and the articles I’ve found and referenced, that Boyd’s Eurobin Hotel was an important hub for the local community. No, it was never the Ritz-Carlton, but it’s a vivid illustration of life in rural Australia during those challenging days - a place that served as a stopover, a post office, a gathering point, and a lifeline in a remote and often unforgiving landscape.
- I could create a section on my own website, but once I’m gone, the information is lost.
- In summary, if I’m fighting a losing battle trying to make myself understood here - if the relevance of this page, though on a small scale important to many in the Ovens Valley area, isn’t apparent - let’s just call it. Typing isn’t easy for me anymore, as I’ve previously mentioned, and if I’m flogging the proverbial dead horse, I’d rather focus on other things.
- Thank you once again for your time and consideration.
- Blackcatsx Blackcatsx (talk) 09:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, I have read many old American newspapers and their style is similar – they didn't have as much in-depth explanatory journalism, while mundane goings-on were regularly reported. But with that, we have notability standards on Wikipedia, and we simply do not need such mundane things to have their own articles. Countless people and places have received this sort of coverage, and post offices, stopovers, and gathering points, or combinations thereof, are simply not notable or need articles due to their existence or perceived local importance. We expect substance to our sources, and that's not present here. Reywas92Talk 16:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for these summaries. The first article provides two sentences of coverage about the hotel. It says, "In July 1870, he became landlord of the Eurobin hotel, which was known in the old coaching days as the half-way house between Bright and Myrtleford. For 20 years he presided over that then well-known hostelry." This is not significant coverage of the hotel. Based on your description, the other sources mention the hotel in passing but do not "addres[s] the topic directly and in detail" as required by the notability guideline. Are there any other sources that provide at least two or three paragraphs of coverage about the hotel? I'm not seeing enough to meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline at the moment. Cunard (talk) 10:55, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per my comment above and Reywas92's analysis. The hotel does not meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline as it has not received significant coverage in reliable sources. I wanted to retain this article about a historical hotel, but the sources do not support such a position. In many cases when editors create articles on historical hotels, there is at least some coverage that supports the hotels' historical significance and notability. But in this case, the sources are passing mentions and do not say why the hotel is historically significant. This article could be redirected to Eurobin#History per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. But as Reywas92 noted about the sources,
not a single one of them is more than the barest passing mention
. Given how little coverage this hotel has received, it is likely undue weight to mention it at Eurobin#History. Cunard (talk) 09:08, 23 December 2024 (UTC)- My apologies. I just saw this written yesterday. My last post was in response to yours of 22nd of December. I just want to clarify - are you saying Boyd’s Eurobin Hotel wouldn’t even fit into the Eurobin#History section, or do you mean it could be redirected there with a shorter version of the content?
- From everything I’ve researched, it’s clear the hotel played a pretty central role in Eurobin’s history. It wasn’t just a place for travellers to stop; it also served as the post office, a gathering spot for community events, a venue for political speeches, and even a recovery site for injured travellers. I’ve come across many such articles backing this up - mentions of election candidates holding speeches, accounts of the hotel being used for first aid, and more details about its role as a post office. But they’re all small articles, not detailed features, which reflects the reality of 19th-century Australian regional reporting.
- I genuinely believe it tells an important story about life in regional Australia during that era, even if it wasn’t the grandest establishment around. I’d really appreciate knowing which direction you think makes the most sense so I can focus my energy in the right place. Blackcatsx (talk) 09:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete if the best source is "Ovens and Murray Advertiser" that is local coverage as per WP:AUD and doesn't meet WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 12:26, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your feedback. I respectfully disagree with the assessment that this article relies solely on local coverage under WP:AUD. While The Ovens and Murray Advertiser was a regional publication serving a broad area of North East Victoria (not just Eurobin itself), The Age - a major metropolitan newspaper from Melbourne - also provides coverage of events related to Boyd’s Eurobin Hotel.
- The historical reporting style of 19th-century rural Australia must also be considered here. Comprehensive feature articles on smaller but significant establishments simply weren’t the norm in regional reporting. Instead, details about places like Boyd’s Hotel are found in smaller, event-focused articles, which, when viewed collectively, paint a clear picture of its importance.
- Boyd’s Eurobin Hotel wasn’t just an inn - it served as a coaching stop, the local post office, a political campaign venue, and even a recovery centre for injured travellers. These roles demonstrate its significance in the social, logistical, and political life of Eurobin and the surrounding region.
- Again, I’ve also found mentions in The Age, which further reinforces that coverage wasn’t limited to regional publications.
- I believe these factors satisfy the criteria for WP:ORG, considering the historical context and the coverage we can reasonably expect from rural reporting of that time.
- If there are specific areas you feel need improvement or additional focus, I’m happy to work on them.
- Best regards,
- Blackcatsx Blackcatsx (talk) 13:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Boyd’s Eurobin Hotel wasn’t just an inn - it served as a coaching stop, the local post office, a political campaign venue, and even a recovery centre for injured travellers. These roles demonstrate its significance in the social, logistical, and political life of Eurobin and the surrounding region.
Its role is irrelevant in meeting the notability guidelines. This fails WP:ORG. Please list the sources you found in the Age. LibStar (talk) 13:58, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Timeline of Spiritism (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 timeline is not notable, and it is not supported by significant reliable sources Drew Stanley (talk) 21:28, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - no reason to exist. Yes to a category and yes to a History of spiritualism article. I would not oppose a move. Bearian (talk) 19:57, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Bearian, if you are okay with an article move, it sounds like you are open to Keeping this article under a different page title. Liz Read! Talk! 07:33, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as the "Delete" vote looks like it is also a possible "Keep and Move" vote.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Arms trade (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)
Before people go nuts about this, I am AfDing the disambiguation page at this location and not the concept of "arms trade". It seems like the clear and obvious primary topic for a redirect is arms industry as arms trafficking/weapon smuggling is usually called... well, that. Alternatively, if the page is independently notable, WP:REDLINK applies and it should be opened up to article creation. Either way, a DAB page does not belong here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Technology. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:15, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, we should redirect Arms trade->Arms industry, Arms industry is clearly the primary topic. according to pageviews I think putting Small arms trade and arms trafficking in the hat notes for arms industry would suffice, although moving the existing page to Arms trade (disambiguation), and having that in the hatnotes would be fine too. I'm not sure this even needs an AFD, you could probably just withdraw the AFD and make the change! JeffUK 09:42, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Personally I am not sure this needs to exist at all. Small arms trade falls under WP:PTM. Arms trafficking can be in a hatnote. That's why I went for AfD rather than moving the page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, we should redirect Arms trade->Arms industry, Arms industry is clearly the primary topic. according to pageviews I think putting Small arms trade and arms trafficking in the hat notes for arms industry would suffice, although moving the existing page to Arms trade (disambiguation), and having that in the hatnotes would be fine too. I'm not sure this even needs an AFD, you could probably just withdraw the AFD and make the change! JeffUK 09:42, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per "WP:NODABS" (the idiot cousin of WP:TWODABS), and created a redirect to Arms industry. There are no entries to disambiguate. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Arms industry. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:38, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect (actually "restore redirect") to Arms industry, which has many appropriate wikilinks and See also entries. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:33, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Blunt instrument (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:DICDEF, being mostly a definition of what a "blunt instrument" is and some examples. Wikipedia is not a phrasebook and therefore unless something can be found to demonstrate its standalone notability, it probably shouldn't remain as an article. While I have a feeling blunt weapon may be notable, nothing in particular from this article is salvageable so it would have to be created from scratch anyway. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, History, Military, and Technology. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Since the term "blunt instrument" can have multiple uses (in espionage, for example), this article makes little sense. Leaning toward Delete at this time. Intothatdarkness 16:15, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I don’t think this is a DICDEF fail - it’s not about the phrase blunt instrument, it’s just about the weapon in the context of criminology. It’s just a stub. And if the title is the issue that can be changed, so I don’t think the reasons above are good for deletion (though I think blunt instrument is actually the better title). This is not at all a TNT case. Will look for sources later - I would guess there is enough in criminology sources to pass GNG and I don’t know where else we’d cover this so it’s not a NOPAGE situation. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, so... that just makes it a criminology term. Same difference. Wikipedia is also not a legal handbook either, so WP:INDISCRIMINATE applies. There has to be multiple RS discussing blunt instruments as they relate to law, and right now the only source is not about blunt instruments, but blunt force trauma, which can be caused by things other than blunt instruments such as transportation fatalities. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:27, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- By that logic everything is a DICDEF violation. Yes, which is why I said I would look for sources later, and why I did not vote yet. WP:INDISCRIMINATE does not apply: this is not data, a plot summary, lyrics, or lists of software updates (the examples it gives!), or anything analogous to that. Stubs are not a violation of INDISCRIMINATE. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- The article as it stands is not a definition, and you would not find anything similar in scope to this article in a dictionary, phrasebook or legal handbook. The literal (rather than figurative) definition at Wiktionary is a single sentence long, for example. A dictionary would not place the term in wider context, contrasting other categories of weapon in the same classification framework, or contrasting the perspectives of different disciplines such as criminology or medicine. The list of commonly improvised blunt instrument weapons is also highly undictionary-like. WP:DICDEF doesnt work, Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE doesn't work either because information in context is not indiscriminate. Also not data as User:PARAKANYAA mentions, but thats two ways that Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE isn't applicable. 似た牌愛魔 (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, so... that just makes it a criminology term. Same difference. Wikipedia is also not a legal handbook either, so WP:INDISCRIMINATE applies. There has to be multiple RS discussing blunt instruments as they relate to law, and right now the only source is not about blunt instruments, but blunt force trauma, which can be caused by things other than blunt instruments such as transportation fatalities. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:27, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, or at least not delete. This information should exist somewhere onwiki, though I'm not sure that it is best served as its own page. A merge would be better, but I can't think of a target.
- Some sources I found quickly, I can look for more if you want:
- Weapon Use in Korean Homicide: Differences Between Homicides Involving Sharp and Blunt Instruments
- Blunt Force Injuries: Blunt Instrument Blows, Fall from a Height, Collisions
- BLUNT HEAD TRAUMA: COMPARISON OF VARIOUS WEAPONS WITH INTRACRANIAL INJURY AND NEUROLOGIC OUTCOME
- Patterns of non-firearm homicide
- Information on the considerations of attacks resulting from this kind of weapon is encyclopedic. No opposition to a merge or appropriate redirect later PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:00, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- These seem to indicate to me a merge to blunt trauma would be best, maybe creating an "in crime" or "inflicted by weapons" section because it extends to other accidents besides criminal acts. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:09, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Would be fine by me, though it may fit awkwardly there, unsure. I just feel strongly that information about this concept should go... somewhere. PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- These seem to indicate to me a merge to blunt trauma would be best, maybe creating an "in crime" or "inflicted by weapons" section because it extends to other accidents besides criminal acts. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:09, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- redirect to blunt trauma, because virtually anything hard, from baseball ball to candlestick to 4x4 to riffle butt may serve as a "blunt instrument" of an assault and the term is used almost exclusively as a catch-it-all term in context of traumas when the actual object is not identified. --Altenmann >talk 18:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect. The article is more or less about everyday objects that can be used to bash someone. Article has existed for 18 years and notability has yet to be shown. Could redirect to Weapon, as the 2nd paragraph there says "ordinary objects such as sticks, rocks, bottles, chairs, and vehicles can be used as weapons", and blunt instruments are mentioned in the Weapon#Types section. Nurg (talk) 08:49, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: I've bulk-added a handful of academic sources, of various degrees of SIGCOV. May need more careful pruning. Not to WP:WHATABOUT this, but we have an article for each of the other 18 weapon types listed in Weapon#By_function. I have no doubt there are sources beyond the ones I've just added. This needs work, not BLAR. Owen× ☎ 17:42, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, I just noticed most of the sources I added were already found by PARAKANYAA... Owen× ☎ 17:44, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, no consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Battle of Devarakonda (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)
Deleted due to lack of sourcing, this article was refunded to draftspace after an editor said sources were available and then moved to mainspace. However, the newly supplied sources still do not support notabilty. Each of the three sources included here ([2], [3], [4] has a single paragraph or less out of a full-length book on this battle. These sources verify that this battle took place, but is not WP:SIGCOV to pass WP:GNG. The only other source I found in my WP:BEFORE is a post on a blog of questionable reliability. (It says it allows "anyone with a reasonable grounding in the Dharmic Indian civilization to air their views.") If there's a valid redirect target I'm open to it but I don't know what it would be. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Telangana. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 15:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: I can find sufficient significant coverage (SIGCOV) in all three sources. The first source provides more than a page of coverage (pages 33–34), not just a paragraph. The second source also offers nearly a full page of coverage. While the third source is not fully accessible, its preview suggests at least two pages dedicated to this event. These sources should be sufficient to establish notability, and there was no need to consider a non-reliable source like Pragyata in the first place. Malik-Al-Hind (talk) 10:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- The first source contains 336 words on this battle. The second source contains 211 words. These are paragraph-length passages; one of them is a literal paragraph. (The third source, which you said you can't see, has only two references visible in search to the battle, so it's quite a leap to assume from those snippets that it's SIGCOV.) The article itself is 411 words long, which suggests some degree of WP:SYNTH or WP:OR in managing to find more to say than its source material. That indicates this battle is insufficiently notable for a standalone page per WP:NOPAGE. Again, open to a redirect if there's a war or campaign this battle was part of, but I don't know what that would be. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Okay. The article body has 339 words (lead and infobox should not be taken into account). And, as far as I know, that is not what SYNTH and OR state. Even if it exceeds the sources in word count a little bit, I don't see a problem here. It is not necessary that content words in a Wikipedia article should match exactly with its sources. Coming to the third source, from what I can see, there is a certain pattern on pages 53–54 that follows the other two sources in terms of describing this event, so it is safe to assume that it contains at least 2 pages, or roughly 3 pages, of coverage. Malik-Al-Hind (talk) 13:27, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- The first source contains 336 words on this battle. The second source contains 211 words. These are paragraph-length passages; one of them is a literal paragraph. (The third source, which you said you can't see, has only two references visible in search to the battle, so it's quite a leap to assume from those snippets that it's SIGCOV.) The article itself is 411 words long, which suggests some degree of WP:SYNTH or WP:OR in managing to find more to say than its source material. That indicates this battle is insufficiently notable for a standalone page per WP:NOPAGE. Again, open to a redirect if there's a war or campaign this battle was part of, but I don't know what that would be. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: I can find sufficient significant coverage (SIGCOV) in all three sources. The first source provides more than a page of coverage (pages 33–34), not just a paragraph. The second source also offers nearly a full page of coverage. While the third source is not fully accessible, its preview suggests at least two pages dedicated to this event. These sources should be sufficient to establish notability, and there was no need to consider a non-reliable source like Pragyata in the first place. Malik-Al-Hind (talk) 10:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:27, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pantodapoi (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)
Unreferenced stub gives a definition for "Pantodapoi" which appears to be original research as the main sources found online are product pages for "Pantodapoi Phalangite" miniatures made by a maker called "Xyston". Does not meet WP:GNG. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Toys, and Greece. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm not expert enough with Greek military units to feel confident in voting, but I did check some typical reference sources, including Harper's Dictionary of Classical Antiquities and Pauly-Wissowa, neither of which has an entry for "pantodapoi". I also checked under "auxiles" or related headwords. A broad search of the classical materials at Perseus turned up the word with reference to a kind of sauce (perhaps I misunderstood) and in a couple of other places, but not with reference to soldiers. A Google search for "pantodapoi soldiers" turned up a set of circular-looking definitions, perhaps based on this article or wherever its definition came from in the first place.
- I suspect that what has happened here is that the article's creator confused a description of some auxiliary soldiers with a name for their unit: pantodapoi phalangites means "miscellaneous soldiers (in a phalanx)", not "a particular type of soldiers (natives) making up a phalanx". But it would be nice to see if anyone with more expertise in Greek military history concurs with this. Not certain that the general notability guideline is what's relevant here; if the definition were correct, I think the topic would be notable. But if, as I believe, the article is the result of a misunderstanding, then it can be deleted as though it were a hoax (albeit an accidental one). P Aculeius (talk) 16:29, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Libyan–Syrian Union (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 article is at least two-thirds fluff. In its entirety, it is background, direct excerpts from a book, an uninformative scheduling timeline, and the personal puffery and conjecture of the respective heads of state. Given it is about a polity that never existed or even got at all close to existing, coverage of it should likely be limited to a blurb between a sentence and a paragraph in length on a handful of related articles. Remsense ‥ 论 01:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Politics, Africa, and Middle East. Remsense ‥ 论 01:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Draftify or Merge into Federation of Arab Republics#Other Federations of Arab Republics. The topic appears to be notable, e.g. The Washington Post, but probably not as an individual article, and the current set of sources are mostly offline and/or non-English, and the current editors have left in place in the current version what is very likely a WP:COPYVIO, which even has numerical references apparently from the original source retained:
which provided for an "organic union" [7] or a complete merger of the two states. [5] [2] ... and thus become the core of a pan-Arab union . [9] ... effectively meant that the project failed. [10] [11]
, implying that no serious copyediting of the article has been done yet. The merge would best need someone in addition to EpicAdventurer to also have access to the existing sources, which appear to be mostly offline and/or non-English, or else to online English WP:RS such as The Washington Post (reliable in this context for factual type statements). Boud (talk) 02:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC) (clarify Boud (talk) 22:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)) - Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Libya and Syria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge. I agree a standalone article is probably not warranted but there’s enough for a section in a broader article. There was a time when hardly a week passed without Arab states announcing unions. Mccapra (talk) 21:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Draftify: We also have the Arab Islamic Republic, which is smaller in size and surrounded by many unverified rumors. Additionally, we have the United Arab Republic (1972), which I doubt many have heard of. There are sources, books, and interviews about this experiment, and we even have interlanguage links about it. Valorthal77 (talk) 04:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Draftify or merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Emirate of Banu Talis (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)
Appears to fail WP:GNG: no English-language sources seem to mention this tribe or emirate at all, much less any indication of significance. At least some of the cited sources do not appear reliable, such as this webpage with no clear scholarly credentials, or the vague citations to an online transcription of Ibn Khaldun ([5]), a primary source. Much of the article is also poorly cited and may include WP:OR. If there's some alternate spelling of the name that yields accessible and reliable sources, you can mention it here; I've tried to search for a few other alternatives and still found nothing. R Prazeres (talk) 07:33, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep not a hoax and certainly existed. Of the sources provided, 2 and 5 are no use as they just link to Google book index pages and not to actual text pages, but the other refs all check out. In addition I found this and this. The ar.wiki article is a very short stub and this much longer article has many unsourced statements that could be trimmed out, but it needs editing, not deletion. Mccapra (talk) 08:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Libya. Shellwood (talk) 11:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 08:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Jhala Manna (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 article was previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jhala Man Singh and recreated under a different title with sufficient differences that G4 speedy deletion was declined.
However, the recreated version still does not show that the subject passes WP:GNG or WP:NBIO.
- Most sources have one or a handful of passing or WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of the subject (A History of Rajasthan, A History of Mewar, Battle of Haldighati, Jhālā rājavaṃsa, Mewar Saga, Mewar & the Mughal Emperors, and Maharana Pratap: The Invincible Warrior.
- In addition to having trivial mentions, some sources are also considered of questionable reliability per WP:RAJ, such as Tod's Annals of Rajasthan
- One source is WP:SELFPUBLISH: Sacred Mysteries from vanity publisher by Notion Press.
- Chiefs and Leading Families in Rajputana has no mention of Jhala Man Singh/Man Singh Jhala/Jhala Bida/Jhala Manna/Jhala Sardar or any other configuration of his names.
- Another "source" is a poem.
- The final source is an e-commerce site.
No evidence of WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources is found in a WP:BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Military, and Rajasthan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Still not seeing notability, sources are as explained above, not much for showing notability. I still don't find any sources we can sue. Oaktree b (talk) 14:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Article previously at AFD so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Notable person. Mentioned in many sources. He played a significant role in the Battle of Haldighati. Lordo'Web (talk) 19:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We're now at a split opinion, so worth relisting in an attempt to garner further clarity on consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor Talk 06:28, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete article without notability. 190.219.101.225 (talk) 03:56, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. After the source analysis in the nomination statement, any editors arguing to Keep have to counter this assessment of the sources or present ones they believe are reliable. Just saying they exist is not enough.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Raids inside the Soviet Union during the Soviet–Afghan 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)
An unwarranted WP:SPLIT of the Soviet–Afghan War, clearly a Pov ridden article and glorification of measly notable Pakistani raids in Soviet Afghan. Garudam Talk! 00:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, and United States of America. Garudam Talk! 00:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:04, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Its not a Split and these raids aren't "measley notable" in that it involved the forces of four different states infiltrating into the territory of a global superpower. Waleed (talk) 02:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: I think that the article is notable on its own. WP:SPLIT is justified for significant battles of the Soviet-Afghan war. Wikibear47 (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- This could be merged at best. Otherwise, I don't see a reason why this article should exist in the mainspace when the parent article itself does not cover this topic or lacks sources, even if it does. Garudam Talk! 19:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: pure violation of WP:SYNTH. The topic is not notable and the article itself appears to be pushing a POV. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The article has standalone notability of its own established through significant coverage and a necessary split from Soviet-Afghan war article. Muneebll (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- The topic is not even notable for its parent article and lacks citations, clearly it does not pass GNG & SIGCOV. Garudam Talk! 14:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: There are real signs of notoriety here. Furthermore the story must be told without fear of repercussions from Moscow. 190.219.101.225 (talk) 03:21, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Genuine question, what do you mean by repercussions from Moscow? WP:LEGAL for more info. Conyo14 (talk) 08:41, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – Per WP:GNG: The topic has not received significant coverage with the article appearing to push a POV. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:53, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: PoV pushing at best. found nothing notable in my WP:BEFORE.
- Merge to Soviet–Afghan War. My very best wishes (talk) 18:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge with Soviet–Afghan War: It's pretty short as it is, and does need some work to let it less pov-y. It might also need a bit of a copyedit Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 12:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more support for merge as ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Merge with Soviet–Afghan War. Besides the reasons suggested above, there's not enough content to warrant a standalone article. 💥Casualty • Hop along. • 06:45, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: This does not qualify under Wikipedia guidelines for a standalone article. It could be argued if the "raids" ever occurred in Soviet Afghan or it is just a mere hoax, quoting from the Foreign involvement section:
MI6 directly remitted money into an account of Pakistani leader of Jamaat-e-Islami Qazi Hussain Ahmad who had close links with Hekmatyar & Massoud. MI6's aim was for Ahmad to spread radical and anti-Soviet Islamic literature in the Soviet republics in the hope of rebellions against their Communist governments.
I do not find a single raid so far, rather there are just plannings and some covert money transfers to terrorist organisations it seems like a WP:HOAX. Do not merge it when there are only passing mentions of a few words regarding Pakistani raids which are dubious or say hoax event. Nxcrypto Message 11:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC) - Keep or Merge: The article is quite notable but has not been given much attention.
The book what we won in America secret war by Bruce riedel highlights the notability and states that :-
"The cross-border operations were extraordinarily provocative—“bear baiting,” as the ISI later called them. The Russian archives show that on several occasions they successfully disrupted traffic on a critical rail line from Samarkand in Central Asia to the Termez border checkpoint, but they never sparked any dissidence against the Soviets among the Muslim populations of Soviet Uzbekistan or Tajikistan. Eventually the Russians decided that the attacks were too much to tolerate. In April 1987 the Soviet ambassador in Islamabad warned the Pakistani foreign minis ter that if they continued, the Soviet army and air force would retaliate inside Pakistan. By April 1987 General Akhtar had been promoted to a new assignment as chairman of Pakistan’s Joint Chiefs of Staff. Hamid Gul, his successor as director general of the ISI, ordered an end to cross border operations. The pot was boiling a bit too hot for Zia."
Further more in a book by Hein Günter Kiessling Page number 57-58 also mentions:
the mujahideen activities inside soviet union which penetrated 25 km beyond the Amu river which was international border. For example in 1986 a attack on hydro-electric power plants were carried out by mujahideen using Chinese and egyption supplied rocket launchers. These activities caused anger amongst the Russian high command and warning by the soviet ambassador was given and eventually Pakistani high command halted further attacks/Operations given the consequences.
I'm sure more research on this topic will help.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahim231 (talk • contribs)
- You should thoroughly go through WP:MILNG, as there is little to no information available about the raids, such as details on how they unfolded, their results, or their impact. It appears to be a passing mention of an insignificant event that does not warrant an article, let alone using an infobox template for it. Garuda Talk! 20:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I struggle to understand this nomination's logic for delete. The Soviet-Afghan war article is over-WP:SIZE-ed and in dire need of WP:OKFORKing; merging is not a solution. Numerous sources discuss the interventions in the Soviet Union. What sources speak of the raids as "measly"? How does the article glorify the raids or push a particular POV? And *even if* it was possible to answer these questions in the positive, that would be a content issue, not one of notability. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 13:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- You should go through the Raid section and sources have only passing mentions of such militant raids, only spun around the Soviet Afghan War. There's not enough significant coverage to have its own standalone article. Garuda Talk! 14:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is not a content discussion, it is a notability discussion. WP:NEXIST. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 00:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is WP:BUTITEXISTS argument. In order to meet WP:GNG, an article must be sourced by reliable sources with substantial coverage, here it's not the same case. Notability could be established through few lines of passing mentions but that doesn't validate to have a standalone article. Garuda Talk! 01:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is not a content discussion, it is a notability discussion. WP:NEXIST. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 00:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- You should go through the Raid section and sources have only passing mentions of such militant raids, only spun around the Soviet Afghan War. There's not enough significant coverage to have its own standalone article. Garuda Talk! 14:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
History Proposed deletions
edit- Hywel ab Owain (via WP:PROD on 2 November 2024)
History categories
editfor occasional archiving