Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Social science

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Social science. 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|Social science|~~~~}} 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 Social science. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


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

This list includes sublists of deletion debates on articles related to language and history.

See also: Science-related deletions and Medicine-related deletions.

Social science

[edit]

Is women empowerment still relevant

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

This is an essay that expresses the author's viewpoint, not an encyclopaedic article. As such, it violates WP:NOTESSAY, and WP:DELREASON#14 (Any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia) applies. TompaDompa (talk) 18:13, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, WP:NOTESSAY SDGB1217 (talk) 23:04, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alok Dixit

[edit]
Alok Dixit (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)

Promotional article about a journalist and activist, who received some passing mentions or trivial coverage in the news articles associated with his ex-wife Laxmi Agarwal and his associate Aseem Trivedi. He also received some mentions in the news articles related to " 'Anonymous' hackers to protest Indian Internet laws", but the subject fails WP:SIGCOV & WP:GNG.

The article was created in 2012 by a Wp:SPA. Zuck28 (talk) 15:28, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Creative Cities

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

I can find very little to show this project meets GNG at all. The article is very outdated and largely sourced to primary sources. CoconutOctopus talk 16:57, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Role of social media in the modern reparations movement

[edit]
Role of social media in the modern reparations movement (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)

Another article created by a faulty editathon. This article is inevitably full of WP:SYNTH and is likely written using an AI tool, added line by line to inflate their edit counts (if you have the greatest number of edits, you stand to win a cash prize.) Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 06:34, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- the article was repeating itself over-and-over again
- the article read much more like an essay than a Wikipedia article
- multiple sources were fictitious/non-existent
- it was chock-full of original research and WP:SYNTH
- and it was most likely partially or fully-AI generated.
The topic itself doesn't seem very notable either, since reparations for slavery already has an article. I don't think this is salvageable. ApexParagon (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Just all kinds of wrongs here, the LLM use, the synth, largely repeating other articles... This badly needs reworking, but I don't see anything useful to be saved. Oaktree b (talk) 20:31, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per SYNTH and LLM use, any such content in future would be better suited to a section on an existing page first before being grown to potentially an entirely separate page. lizthegrey (talk) 10:14, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reduction of working hours in France

[edit]
Reduction of working hours in France (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no indication the reduction of working hours in France specifically is notable per GNG. The current article amalgamates various historical information in WP:OR/WP:SYNTH fashion. The only topical source cited explains that the reduction of working hours is a global phenomenon. This is further corroborated by the highly cited paper Huberman, Michael; Minns, Chris (2007). "The times they are not changin': Days and hours of work in Old and New Worlds, 1870–2000" (PDF). Explorations in Economic History. 44 (4): 538–567. doi:10.1016/j.eeh.2007.03.002. which supports the same conclusion. JBchrch talk 12:36, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Rozanna

[edit]
Sri Rozanna (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)

COI/UPE editing was moved to mainspace after being draftified and then declined at AfC. Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 15:55, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Technological theory of social production

[edit]
Technological theory of social production (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 just promotes the work of one scholar. The work does not appear to be highly cited or have sustained academic coverage. The article exclusively cites one scholar, with exception of WP:SYNTH citations to works that do not specifically talk about this theory. Thenightaway (talk) 23:05, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. This is just a description of one scholar's niche theory with a bit of added SYNTH. The primary source for this theory has a mid-double digit citation count and does not appear to have been discussed or evaluated in depth by other scholars. The creator also created Vladimir Pokrovskii and Econodynamics, so it seems pretty clear that they have an interest in promoting this individual's work. I can't find any sources that would indicate that this is a notable theory. MCE89 (talk) 03:08, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Economics, Mathematics, and Social science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:53, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Dear Editor,
    Thank you for your reading and analyzing my contribution ‘Econodynamics’ and ‘Technological theory of social production’.
    I agree with comments of the Reviewers.
    I think the article ‘Technological theory of social production’ should be deleted, because it is too technical and could not be improved, without removing the technical details. The better exposition of the essentially same topic gives the article ‘Econodynamics’ . Nevertheless, I think the article could be given more concise and suitable for Encyclopedia form to explain to the readers what can be the use of application of thermodynamics to the economy problems. I shall try to do this, if the editors keep the article ‘Econodynamics’ at Wikipedia.
    Sincere, The creator of the articles, Madliner 46.39.57.196 (talk) 13:54, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for the same reasons articulated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Econodynamics. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 23:38, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gen Z stare

[edit]
Gen Z stare (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)

Extremely new social phenomena that has no peer reviewed studies (social sciences) Zedd1997 (talk) 20:52, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remove This article has much to say about what the so-called "Gen z stare" indicates about the generation, but has very little evidence it exists in the first place. It would be better placed within the mass psychogenic illness article. Xennial ambassador (talk) 15:00, 20 July 2025 (UTC) — Xennial ambassador (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
(EC) On the contrary. All the sources are news reports from news organizations with a reputation for fact checking and journalistic integrity. Each of these sources, of which there are ten in the Wikipedia article, fit the description for an independent and reliable source on Wikipedia. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 15:49, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, regarding "an authoritative source" - experts are noted to have commented on this phenomenon in this Wikipedia article. And reliable sources in the Wikipedia world are authoritative on the subject each of them covers. Furthermore, saying that these sources are just quoting Tik Tok users is a mischaracterization of the sources, as well as quite the exaggeration. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 15:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's a certain irony in complaining about too little evidence, then opining that the concept should be covered in mass psychogenic illness without providing evidence for it. Ed [talk] [OMT] 07:09, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is there any serious coverage of this that predates the July 14 NY Times article? Thriley (talk) 15:48, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Media coverage shows it to be a topic. Later on, if media coverage dries up, it can be merged into staring. You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows, and you don't need peer-reviewed scholarship to know that a topic is part of the zeitgeist. By analogy, Wikipedia had an article on Joe the Plumber long before any peer-reviewed scholarship on the topic (if there ever was any). —Anomalocaris (talk) 20:05, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I want to link to this comment on a user talk page, because it indicates that multiple new sources have very recently been published: [4]. I think that further strengthens the case that GNG has been met. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:42, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove I agree with Xennial ambassador, there seems to be lots of overanalyzing the meaning behind the “Gen Z stare,” perpetuating yet another unnecessarily negative generational divide. There are people from ALL generations that can both give and disapprove of such a stare. Do we really need to add fuel to this buzzwordy trend by having a Wikipedia article about it already? Just let it take shape first. And again, it entirely fails to prove that this behavior actually exists in any meaningful or measurable way. This is speculative and relies on assumptions and stereotypes. Let's eat grandma (talk) 04:54, 21 July 2025 (UTC) — Let's eat grandma (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Remove I’m not sure any of this page is factual information, “sources” cited are almost entirely fluff articles from news sources or someone quoting a TikTok user. On top of that, there are conclusions drawn multiple times that have no factual basis. I’m not sure that 80%+ of this article should remain published 2603:3024:2102:C500:7C49:2A3A:3F11:E03E (talk) 18:13, 21 July 2025 (UTC) — 2603:3024:2102:C500:7C49:2A3A:3F11:E03E (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep Agree with above that the article passes GNG because of copious media coverage. Whether its a "real thing" or what the "implications" are, it's something that people have identified as existing and reported on in reputable sources. Additionally, the article is valuable to people googling the term this week (which is how I found it). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Audiodude (talk • contribs) 21:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Soft news churning where newspapers react to social media comments. We shouldn't have an article on this the same reason we don't have an article on Gen Z eating pickles despite both having coverage in reputable sources. 195.99.42.18 (talk) 08:49, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove. No secondary sources. Importance--lower than Low. The current interest in term "Gen Z stare" is temporary, and the whole term will likely be forgotten in a few weeks.
Ion Soggo (talk) 16:58, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It can be subjective, to distinguish primary from secondary sources, when the sources are in news media, as most of the sources here are. But I think it's fair to say that the sources are independent and multiple, and reflect notice of the page subject. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:00, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I am sympathetic to many of the concerns expressed above about this topic and I think a major rewrite is needed to address them. However, let's look at the known facts: from 14-22 July we've had a steady drumbeat of international coverage, perhaps around 50 sources or so. This is a global, cultural phenomenon occurring from the Philippines (Manila Standard)[5] to Finland (Hufvudstadsbladet)[6]. Viriditas (talk) 00:13, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per a variety of WP:SIGCOV-granting sources and the spirit of WP:RAPID (spirit because it's typically applied to event articles). For example, this lengthy Vox piece published hours before this nomination should have been an clear WP:BEFORE catch. Moreover, not one delete !voter (including the nominator!) has supplied an argument that is either factual and/or based in our policies and guidelines. I'd echo Tryptofish's note for the closer about weighting the !votes here. Ed [talk] [OMT] 07:09, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This meets WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV easily from a wide array of RSes. If there are encyclopedic problems with how the article is phrased, those can be remedied by changing the content of the article rather than deleting it. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 20:02, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Nearly 25,000 views in the last 30 days, really the last week, shows a lot of interest and demand in the topic. There is no academic research on it because it was only recently identified. It is being compared to the millennial pause and is without a doubt notable. It seems like its a recent fad coverage, but this is starting to reach academic interest, as the article notes. Metallurgist (talk) 20:56, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep GNG is met. Any other personal takes or preferences by definition take a backseat to that. -- Very Polite Person (talk) 21:56, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Floodgate effect

[edit]
Floodgate effect (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)

Possibly specific to Singaporean English as creator might be from Singapore? As a Brit I have never heard this phrase although Brits might say “open the floodgate”. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:53, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ReadPartner

[edit]
ReadPartner (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)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 20:25, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I performed my own searches using Google and did not find anything except this, which looks like AI-generated undisclosed paid news crap, and other sources like that (blogs, product listings, articles filled with SEO-optimized affiliate links). There's simply no usable coverage other than the GeekFlare source, which I can't determine if it's usable or not, but even if it is, one source is not enough. OutsideNormality (talk) 21:13, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Laro people

[edit]
Laro 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)

The reference on the page doesn't look to be a RS. The difficulty of identifying sources is that many speak of the Laro language rather than identifying an ethnic group. Whilst it seems obvious that if there is a language there is a corresponding group, it's not really for an encyclopedia to make this assertion. JMWt (talk) 09:49, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 10:10, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - addressing the sources offered by @Ike Lek: above:
source [1] above is titled Laru Vowel Harmony and the paragraph on page 22 says The Laru language is spoken in the Nuba Mountains of Southern Kordofan Province in Sudan. Because of insecurity in the home area, there are large displaced communities in Khartoum, Port Sudan, Sennar, and Atbara. According to the Sudan census of 1984, which excludes speakers living outside the home area, the number of the native speakers is 7600. According to a recent estimate (2003), which may include other tribes that are grouped under the Laru by the area administration, the population is 25-50,000.
page 31 is a discussion about the spelling of a word in English
source [3] appears to be talking about Eugenics
In my opinion the strongest source offered here is clearly talking about a language group. As I suggest above, it wouldn't be a surprise to learn that there is an ethnic group that speaks this language, however it isn't the job of Wikipedia to make this assertion. We can't have pages that are only referenced obliquely. I still can't really see how this information wouldn't be better covered in Laro language until such time as better sources are found. JMWt (talk) 10:43, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These quotes from the first sources are more what I was referring to, especially as they could provide clues as to what to search for to find more information: "The Laru are known by other Sudanese as Liira or Alliira, which are names given to the Laru by outsiders." and "According to a recent estimate (2003), which may include other tribes that are grouped under the Laru by the area administration, the population is 25- 50,000." Page 31 contains translations for terms such as "Laru homeland" and "person of Laru" separate from "language of Laru".
I suggest we take extra care before making a decision on this AfD, as erasing the existence of an ethnic group group from Wikipedia can have major consequences, especially with LLMs feeding off Wikipedia and then being used to make decisions.
I would say the strongest source is probably the second one, so I would be curious to hear to assessment of it. Also, to be explicitly clear, I do not support human eugenics. I don't think anyone was saying that I did, but just in case, I do not want that to be misunderstood. Ike Lek (talk) 20:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I still do not support eugenics, I do question how you came to the conclusion that it is the subject of the third source I gave. Further review seems to suggest that while it does use pseudo-scientific racial categorization at some points in the book, it does give a historically-based ethno-linguistic categorization of Nuba peoples not directly tied to eugenics. Please let me know if I am wrong about this, as I do not have access to the complete book. Ike Lek (talk) 21:01, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:33, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Social science Proposed deletions

[edit]

Language

[edit]

List of misleadingly-named foods

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
List of misleadingly-named foods (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:OR listcruft, same reasoning applies as for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of misleadingly-named foods which led to deletion. Fram (talk) 08:24, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian toponyms in Slovakia

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

I found a scholarly source https://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/mgrsd-2019-0005 but I don’t think that is enough to show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 15:16, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

God of the Sullied

[edit]
God of the Sullied (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)

Non notable book, promotional article. Sources are press releases, paid for spam articles. See also:

  • Delete. Sources 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 are not WP:SIGCOV of the book itself, but some other topic (the author's publishing house, the author's other books, etc.). Sources 4, 9, 10, 12, and 13 (same source as 4) are overly positive and promotional reviews with WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues. Source 2 is a broken link that I can't access through the Internet Archive. I can't find any proof of Source 11's existence. That leaves Source 8, which requires payment to view and wouldn't satisfy WP:NBOOK by itself anyway. Astaire (talk) 23:37, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gone Are the Days (novel)

[edit]
Gone Are the Days (novel) (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)

Non notable book. Fails GNG and NBOOK. Sources are poor to unreliable, primary PR links by Wp:NEWSORGINDIA.

See also:

The Indian Story of an Author

[edit]
The Indian Story of an Author (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)

Non notable book, fails Wp:GNG, wp:NBOOK and wp:SIGCOV. Possible COI & UPE. UNI is paid for press release, New Indian Express is an interview, and rest two are promotional articles by wp:NEWSORGINDIA.

See also:

Diary of a Whimsical Lover

[edit]
Diary of a Whimsical Lover (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)

Non notable book. Fails Wp:NBOOK, Wp:GNG and Wp:SIGCOV. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief. Zuck28 (talk) 20:41, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • The first reference is a broken link, and I can't find it on the Internet Archive.
  • The second and fourth references have the same issues that I raised over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief - lack of a reviewer byline and overly promotional content, respectively.
  • The third reference is a brief three-sentence plot summary without expressing any opinion on the book. Doesn't qualify for criterion #1 of WP:BKCRIT.
Astaire (talk) 22:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond Countless Grief

[edit]
Beyond Countless Grief (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)

Non notable book. Fails Wp:NBOOK, Wp:GNG and Wp:SIGCOV. No sources except two poorly written press releases/non-bylined promotional pieces and an unreliable dead link. Possibly a case of COI/UPE. User: Bond111 and their alternative account user:Dial911 were heavily involved in the creation and editing of the articles related to the author Gaurav Sharma (author) and his non-notable books. Zuck28 (talk) 20:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Floodgate effect

[edit]
Floodgate effect (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)

Possibly specific to Singaporean English as creator might be from Singapore? As a Brit I have never heard this phrase although Brits might say “open the floodgate”. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:53, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian toponyms in Zakarpattia Oblast

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

I doubt this is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 05:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus. If you are suggsting a merge or reditect, please provide an activr link to the target article so we know it exitsts.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:48, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Greek exonyms

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Greek exonyms (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)

Cleanup and sourcing was discussed in the 2007 deletion discussion - I think anyone who wants to cleanup or source this has had enough time by now Chidgk1 (talk) 16:31, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This article has already been brought to AFD before so is not eligible for a Soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:08, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Names of Belarusian places in other languages

[edit]
Names of Belarusian places in other languages (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)

Wikipedia is not a dictionary Chidgk1 (talk) 16:21, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Belarus. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:21, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Are there any good ATDs for this? You are right that it isn't very encyclopedic, but it is a great index that I would love to be kept in some form. Is there another Wikimedia project that it would fit better on? I would like it to continue to exist, even though this isn't the right place for it. – Ike Lek (talk) 22:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    How do you use this table and how know the quality is "great" when there are no sources? Is that because you checked a sample by flipping round language links? Perhaps a Belarussian reading this would like to translate it to Belarussian Wikipedia? However I don’t know their rules. Another alternative if you need it in bulk might be to make a Wikidata query. Or could AI nowadays flip round the language links on your request? Or are you saying it is useful to you because some articles don't exist in other languages? In which case without sources how can you trust the info? Chidgk1 (talk) 06:25, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I have come to realize that the Yiddish translations are maybe a bit rougher than I thought. I was going to manually update Wikidata items, but I've decided against it due to the lack of citations. Sorry to bother you. Ike Lek (talk) 06:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Italian exonyms in Istria

[edit]
List of Italian exonyms in Istria (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)

TadejM says it is notable but with only one cite on the Italian article I am not sure Chidgk1 (talk) 15:54, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Istria has a sizable Italian population. These names are used in the areas with the Italian minority and are commonly mentioned in their media. The Italian Wikipedia provides several citations for them. --TadejM my talk 18:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Italian Wikipedia has more than one citation. I think you may have missed them as they as separate from the "Bibliografia" section. Because of both the history of Italians in Istria, and the current modern significance of the names, Italian exonyms for places in Istria is a notable topic, and a list is not inappropriate. – Ike Lek (talk) 22:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Fails WP:NOTDICT. There are some exonym articles that are encyclopedic, such as Chinese exonyms, but that article contains well-sourced contextual information and mostly restricts the list to exonyms that have received secondary coverage. The Italian version of this article appears to rely mainly on primary sources. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists states Some other, non-glossary lists of words can also yield an encyclopedic page, such as List of English words containing Q not followed by U, the condition being that reliable secondary sources for the topic can be cited. (emphasis mine) Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:54, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And even with secondary sources, there's still a WP:NOTDICT argument against having exhaustive lists of exonyms. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:39, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retracting this; a list of toponyms seems less crazy than I originally thought, assuming that sources exist, even though it would be quite large. It could be eventually merged into one or more general lists such as List of locations in Istria County. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 07:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Coming back to this, I find myself reconsidering whether these names are truly exonyms at all, as many have official status and are used locally by ethnic Italians. If the page isn't even about true exonyms, this changes things significantly. – Ike Lek (talk) 05:15, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think they are actually endonyms.[13] --TadejM my talk 11:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the same is true for the region of Dalmatia and a similar article (List of Italian exonyms in Dalmatia) was recently deleted by PROD. IF the outcome of this AfD is anything other than delete, then the same should apply to that list. Giuliotf (talk) 18:48, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pages 74 and 75 of this may be of note here [14]. Ike Lek (talk) 22:24, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: relisting given concerns raised by Ike Lek
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:33, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Czech exonyms

[edit]
Czech exonyms (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)

When I language link through to the first entry Albánský Bělehrad it seems to be historical rather than a current exonym. I cannot find the article info in the cite. Also I don’t think this is notable. Also Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:44, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:17, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese exonyms

[edit]
Portuguese exonyms (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)

Although the Portuguese article has lots of citations I am not sure that is enough to show notability on English Wikipedia Chidgk1 (talk) 11:56, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As a prolific contributor to this article and a specialist in linguistics, as well as a native European Portuguese speaker, I posit that articles of this nature are necessary on account of their educational value, cross-linguistic and cross-cultural navigation, and their potential to facilitate translation and multilingual writing. Moreover, they ensure searchability and disambiguation for those who wish to navigate not only any list of Portuguese exonyms, but also any other language, including even endangered languages. Cantrusthestory (talk) 23:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cantrusthestory Thanks for your expertise. Could you possibly add some citations to this article? Perhaps some of those on the Portuguese article. Nowadays most citations (except pdfs) can be easily added by using the “automatic” option in Visual Editor. If you have any difficulty with adding cites please ask or just add them in the right place in a rudimentary way and some helpful Wikignome will tidy them later. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 16:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - obviously WP:DICDEF is not a relevant policy as these are not dictionary definitions. There are plenty of references on pt.wiki, which would appear to be more than enough to satisfy WP:NLIST, happy to have a more forensic discussion of those if that's really necessary. RS on en.wiki do not have to be in English.JMWt (talk) 18:29, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Russian exonyms

[edit]
List of Russian exonyms (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)

Might not be notable. Previous deletion discussions were not specific. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:42, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Serrano dialect

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

I can't find any information about something specifically called the serrano dialect, either in English or in Spanish. "Serrano" in Spanish means "mountain range", so the term "dialecto serrano" is very generic, akin to "city slang". It does not seem to refer a specific dialect from a specific place. In fact, a quick Google search shows that many dialects have been called "dialecto serrano" in different Spanish speaking countries. It does not satisfy the notability requirements for a Wikipedia article. JohnMizuki (talk) 14:52, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: I'm sorry, but I felt obliged to deprod this. Proposed deletion is only for non-controversial topics, and other than politics and religion, nothing is more controversial that whether a certain dialect exists. I have No opinion on the subject. Bearian (talk) 02:11, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that I didn't claim the dialect doesn't exist. I stated that nothing SPECIFICALLY called "Serrano dialect" exists. Once again: the expression "dialecto serrano" in Spanish is a generic term, that has been used in different countries to refer to different dialects. It is the same as the expression "city slang". "Serrano" does not refer to a specific geographic location and is used to refer to any mountain range. This is equivalent to creating an article titled "city slang" that says that "city slang" is the dialect of the city of Paris. It makes no sense whatsoever. JohnMizuki (talk) 13:18, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:24, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Croatian exonyms

[edit]
Croatian exonyms (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)

Previous deletion discussions were not specifically about this article. Discussion on the talk page shows this article may be misinformation or disinformation. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 14:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, at this stage, a source analysis of recently found sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:26, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hindustani kinship terms

[edit]
Hindustani kinship terms (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)

Unnecessary as Wiktionary has Cat:ur:Family and Cat:hi:Family. Note that this is not the same as Chinese kinship or Irish kinship as it doesn't explain the system, rather simply lists various kinship terms which isn't really encyclopædic. "Hindustani kinship" would perhaps be an encyclopædic topic, but not this. — Ö S M A N  (talk · contribs) 11:39, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:30, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:50, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete clearly a piece of Hindustani-English dictrionary. The words re even not used inEnglish languge. 17:43, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Finnish exonyms for places in Norway

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Finnish exonyms for places in Norway (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)

Uncited and not notable. In the past 12 years an enormous amount of uncited info has been added to the internet. So at least we could delete some. Wikipedians opinion on uncited articles may have changed since the last discussion. Chidgk1 (talk) 10:52, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some discussion about Forest Finnish names: https://kielikello.fi/kaskisuomalaisista-metsasuomalaisiksi/ Perhaps rename as Kven and Finnish place names in Norway Kven place names. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 13:33, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify my position here: I don't find a mere list of place names appropriate per WP:NOT (and WP:NOTDICT), but an article that discusses how those names emerged, their legal status etc. is fine. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 15:54, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 14:20, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This isnt even an article in Finnish wiki, altho as above at least it is limited and grounded in a real world consideration. Metallurgist (talk) 21:51, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I've expanded the article to focus exclusively on Kven place names, as that appears to be the best-documented topic. I'm not opposed to including information on Finnish exonyms or Forest Finnish place names, but for now I've left those out. I didn't make any changes to the list of place names, though I think it should be trimmed or at least organized according to some principle. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 21:26, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Very much a notable topic in connection to Norwegian language policy and Norwegianization, as the sources in the article show. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 10:31, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:59, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch exonyms

[edit]
Dutch exonyms (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)

Previous discussions don’t seem to be specific to this article - talk page says it is rubbish Chidgk1 (talk) 12:41, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - this meets the notability requirements of WP:NLIST.
Also, there is ample precedent for this type of article; we have 63 of these articles per Category:Lists of exonyms.--A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 19:46, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. An attempt to delete all of them, a year or two ago, was rejected as too sweeping (some of them, particularly Arabic exonyms, are less WP:DICT than others). —Tamfang (talk) 19:16, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:19, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep - What's the harm in having it?
Ike Lek (talk) 01:02, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs more policy-based arguments.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:13, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

' Delete Not really notable on English Wikipedia. Metallurgist (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 15:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prodded articles

[edit]


History

[edit]

The Jewish Cause: An Introduction to a Different Israeli History

[edit]
The Jewish Cause: An Introduction to a Different Israeli 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)

Would seem to fail WP:NBOOK and lacks other notability from verifiable reliable sources. Iljhgtn (talk) 07:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The book qualifies under Wikipedia:Notability (books) criteria as having at least two real, non-trivial reviews, in respected sources that are independent of the book itself:
  1. Nine page long, wide and deep Dr Levin's review
  2. One page long, substantive and precise Segula Magazine review — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guybas (talk • contribs) 01:57, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Phagwara

[edit]
Battle of Phagwara (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 appears to be violating WP:OR. The battle itself lacks significant coverage. There is nothing to show if this is a notable subject. THEZDRX (User) | (Contact) 03:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoman capture of Zeila

[edit]
Ottoman capture of Zeila (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 GNG and NEVENT. Minorincident, no sources found showing this has WP:SIGCOV from WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. Most sources cited are just a passing mention of this incident, absolutely no significant notability to warrant its own article. Socialwave597 (talk) 02:17, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, apologies for the late response, this page includes sufficient sources about said event, what exactly do you see as wrong here? Samyatilius (talk) 08:30, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No don't delete I won't even bother to say why this page has sufficient sources and is credible Sha19999 (talk) 16:09 23 july 2025 (UTC)

Genetics and the Book of Mormon

[edit]
Genetics and the Book of Mormon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

a giant pile of WP:OR and WP:FRINGE theories, i see no reliable sourcing talking about genetics and mormonism in the citation lists Bluethricecreamman (talk) 02:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree with the points above. The article is primarily general statements about world history. What information there is specifically about this idea could most likely be integrated into another article. Likely doesn't warrant it's own article. A person of sorts (talk) 03:05, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This article is assembled from a warp of original research and weave of synthesis. 107.119.53.130 (talk) 03:14, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

White Flight in Gary

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

I kicked this to draftspace at Draft:White Flight in Gary, but the author contests. It's loaded with unsupported claims and I just don't think it's ready, so I'm seeking feedback from the community on whether this should continue to exist in mainspace or should be workshopped qua draft. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:43, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion - It's extremely challenging to suggest it's got so many unsupported claims, and consequently deleted, when it is subject of many articles - both in news media and academic - and is so worthy of an article in its own right. There are around two dozen or so references, and if something isn't supported by those, flag it - but this is not a reason to remove the entire article. Few, if any, statements are unsupported - and the items flagged as unsupported tend to be referred to in previously marked references and so consequently just need to be marked again. Please be bold and improve rather than deleting Berocca Addict (talk) 18:56, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, what's being proposed here is that the article be incubated and worked on in draftspace rather than in mainspace—not that the article be evaporated. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 19:22, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose both deletion and moving to draft space. I've seen a number of articles in main space that have fewer and poorer citations than this one. Could it use more detail? Yes, but it's unlikely to receive help from other editors if it's in draft space. The most obvious cleanup issue is to remove most of the section headings; we don't need a section for every one, two, or three-sentence paragraph. Indyguy (talk) 20:34, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Qarahamid (1510)

[edit]
Battle of Qarahamid (1510) (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 relies entirely on obscure and partisan Safavid-era Persian chronicles that have not been corroborated by any Ottoman historical sources or modern academic works. Notably, leading Ottoman historians such as Halil Inalcik, Suraiya Faroqhi, Caroline Finkel, and Stanford Shaw do not mention any such battle occurring in 1510 under the name \"Qarahamid.\" Furthermore, the article’s sources are limited to internal court narratives without third-party verification or historiographical analysis.

The description of a 15-day siege and heavy Ottoman defeat contradicts known Ottoman military operations of the era and lacks substantiation in modern historical literature. The article does not meet the general notability guidelines nor does it provide sufficient verifiability as required by Wikipedia’s sourcing standards.

Per WP:V, WP:N, and WP:RS, this article appears to be based on fringe or nationalist interpretations and should therefore be deleted. Al Jazira Front (talk) 19:38, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clausurae

[edit]
Clausurae (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 single-sentence article has remained unsourced and not expanded since 2008. PROD was contested with little reasoning. Fails WP:NOTDICT. MidnightMayhem 23:57, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pan-African Congress on Reparations

[edit]
Pan-African Congress on Reparations (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 looks like it was generated by an LLM. I have already removed non-existent references that were probably hallucinated by the LLM, and the claims that those references purported to support. The remainder of the article is poorly sourced. The topic looks as though it is notable, but I suggest WP:TNT because the content, as unchecked LLM output, cannot be trusted. SunloungerFrog (talk) 06:28, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If more reliably sourced info on reparations can be added to Pan-African Congress (there’s only a sentence about it right now) then redirect there. Due to this article being fully/near-fully generated by AI and having fictitious sources, and containing a lot of info unrelated to the Pan-African Congress, nothing should be merged. ApexParagon (talk) 19:54, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Role of Banks and Insurance Companies in Slavery Profits

[edit]
The Role of Banks and Insurance Companies in Slavery Profits (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 looks like it was generated by an LLM. I have already removed non-existent references that were probably hallucinated by the LLM, and the claims that those references purported to support. The remainder of the article is poorly sourced. The topic looks as though it is notable - I would have draftified it, but the article has already been draftified once. Suggest WP:TNT because the content, as unchecked LLM output, cannot be trusted. SunloungerFrog (talk) 06:06, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, yet another LLM-generated article from that one Africa edit-a-thon, and I'm not sure where this could be redirected to. ApexParagon (talk) 17:29, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ashitha Revolt of 1843

[edit]
Ashitha Revolt of 1843 (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 suffers from significant verifiability issues and relies heavily on sources that appear to be self-published, primary, or not considered reliable according to WP:RS. Many of the citations are to non-academic or potentially biased sources, and several are in Arabic or Turkish without clear indications of their academic standing or independent third-party verification. The article has persistent "citation needed" tags and "fan's point of view" warnings that have been present for a significant time (since at least May 2025). The narrative appears to be primarily drawn from sources that may lack the independence and rigor required for historical topics on Wikipedia. Given the contentious nature of historical events involving ethnic conflicts, a high standard of reliable sourcing is crucial, which this article currently fails to meet. Therefore, I propose deletion unless significant reliable, independent, secondary sources can be provided to establish its notability and ensure verifiability. Artash47 (talk) 23:49, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 00:08, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – On top of the nom, this article was created by a now blocked user and edited by other socks/meats affiliated with violations of WP:GS/AA and other POV-filled articles related to Kurds and Assyrians. In any other case that this event exists and could use coverage, it can be remade, but the current article is not promising. Please also note the talk page of the nominating editor as well. Surayeproject3 (talk) 12:30, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hunan–Jiangxi Soviet

[edit]
Hunan–Jiangxi Soviet (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)

Entirely unsourced and could probably be merged into Jiangxi Soviet or Autumn Harvest Uprising. Also, there is no Chinese-language version of this article, which is curiously odd. Amigao (talk) 21:20, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment After reviewing Autumn Harvest Uprising, it seems like Hunan is heavily covered there. If it is decided to merge and any new information can be properly sourced, it feels like this would be the better of the two articles you mentioned.
Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 19:12, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:22, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rao Mitrasen

[edit]
Rao Mitrasen (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 largely based on non-academic, regionally published & self-published books with limited verifiability. Multiple sources do not meet the standards WP:HISTRS for historical claims. The article shows signs of WP:FANPOV and contains unbalanced, unsourced glorification and conflicting timelines. Chronos.Zx (talk) 16:24, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Racism in Columbus, Ohio

[edit]
Racism in Columbus, Ohio (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:NOPAGE. I believe previous discussions such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tenant harassment lawsuits and cases in Santa Monica and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Climate change in Baden-Württemberg, where a broad topic is given a hyperlocal framing, are relevant here. This article is essentially a history of racism in the United States - the Great Migration, Jim Crow laws, redlining, Brown v. Board of Education, etc. - as applied to a single city. It would not be feasible to have hundreds of articles about "Racism in X U.S. city" with generic content like this. There is nothing extraordinary about the history of racism in Columbus in particular to justify an article. For example, the article currently says that Columbus is the 55th most racially segregated city in the U.S. out of 112 cities - right in the middle of the list. Some of this content can be selectively merged to Columbus, Ohio and Columbus Division of Police. Astaire (talk) 15:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Politics, and Ohio. Astaire (talk) 15:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Discrimination-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:46, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and seems a bit coatracky. Metallurgist (talk) 22:37, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge first 4 paragraphs of History section to Columbus, Ohio#History, delete the rest. Much of this article (sadly) applies to just about every major city in the US, making this a bit of a WP:COATRACK for a generic topic. Other parts of the article might be merge-able to Racism in the United States, as a city-specific example. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 22:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep passes WP:GNG, as there are plenty of great sources here which are specifically about this large American city. It is fine to have local history in Wikipedia naming particular people, places, and events, even if other cities have comparable circumstances. And other places in Amercica do have similar circumstances, because in Category:History of racism in the United States by state or territory, we have several hundred other articles about location-specific circumstances. The nominators are correct that Wikipedia does not seem to currently have any other "Racism by American city" articles, but I am entirely sympathetic to the idea of documenting the intersection of cultural heritage and places, especially when we have so many sources. I also recognize WeirdNAnnoyed's complaint that lots of the history is repeated from other places, but in this article, I see either uncited claims which have other Wikipedia backing like links to main articles which do have citations (" safe for African Americans to visit... only four survive: the Macon Hotel, the Hotel St. Clair") or kind of routine, but with a local authority cited like https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2714730 . As a general principle, I would support anyone creating articles for any well documented civil rights movement in any city, regardless of potential repetition, just so long as there were local sources and wiki-notable concepts to report. Bluerasberry (talk) 23:52, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    passes WP:GNG I actually don't think it does. This source is specifically about racism and public health. This source is specifically about redlining. This source is 80 years old and is mainly about "Negro life" rather than racial discrimination. And the other sources in the article are even less useful. Where are the sources that discuss "racism in Columbus" as a whole, uniting the different topics discussed in the article? If there are none, this runs into WP:BADTHINGS issues, as other users have said.
    Wikipedia does not seem to currently have any other "Racism by American city" articles Not only are there no other "Racism in X U.S. city" articles, there are not even any "Racism in X U.S. state" articles. As far as I can tell, this is the only subnational article about racism in any U.S. location. And there is probably a reason for that: the creator (who is now inactive here) appears to have been very passionate about creating articles on local Ohio topics. Yes, this is a WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST argument, but the argument grows in strength when there are hundreds of cities and 50 states, all of which you argue could have their own "Racism in X" article, and yet none of them exist. We should ask ourselves why that is. Astaire (talk) 06:16, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Astaire: Wikipedia's bar for passing GNG is very low - just two articles on the topic. I se no ambiguity about this article passing GNG. For a topic, we need articles which address that topic, and there is no identify a broad textbook with a unifying vision. As you say, we have articles covering distinct aspects. These include racism in Columbus Ohio for housing discrimination, police, protest events, tourism, and social justice programs. There is no source which combines all of these into a unifying narrative.
While we do not have other racism by American articles, we do have demographic by city articles including LGBTQ culture in Chicago and History of African Americans in Houston. Intersectional topics in Wikipedia are inconsistent because they are low-readership and because we have few editors. Despite this, building out local culture is common in Wikipedia and we have many such articles, even if we do not have complete national sets.
The creator - whose page I watch, and through whose talk page I found this discussion - has been prominent in Wikipedia for their views of thoroughly documenting culture by cities. I think this is a good thing, and wish local historians and interested community members would build out whatever local perspectives they like. Wikipedia does not have a size limit, and we have no need to prune content which passes fact-checking and topical relevance just because a topic is local to the level of a city. Even after all these years, it is also still okay to do new things in Wikipedia. Interest in city history is quite common in every city in the world, even if our Wikipedia editorial ancestors hardly did this. I am in favor of every city in America building out articles like this if anyone organizes content of this quality. Bluerasberry (talk) 13:47, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no source which combines all of these into a unifying narrative. Yes, this is exactly my point: there are sources which cover aspects of the subject, but no source that directly addresses the topic of "racism in Columbus" as a whole. So the case for GNG is dubious.
Compare this with your example of LGBTQ culture in Chicago, where the "Further reading" section gives three whole books that are directly about the general subject.
There is a stronger case for reworking this into History of African Americans in Columbus, à la your second example, since this article is already halfway there. And there are indeed sources which address that topic as a whole: e.g. [25], [26] Astaire (talk) 18:51, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that Wikipedia wants unifying narratives, and this article is deficient for not having one. Despite that, I still feel that GNG is a much lower standard than that.
It could be nice to have an article titled, History of African Americans in Columbus, but if we did, this content would be WP:UNDUE to merge into that for showing a long focused history on only one aspect. We could not just rename this article to be about culture. Also, I do not think we should delete the content of this article just because it is not connected as a subtopic to something higher in the hierarchy. I could establish a brief parent article if that helped the case for this one, but if I did that, the parent article would be a placeholder for a later editor to add more and contain a subsection on racism which pointed to this article. I do not think it is realistic to attract anyone to build a Columbus focused African history article in the next few years though. Bluerasberry (talk) 12:49, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think these sources give unifying narratives over decades, from probably 1800s to 1940s. From the wiki article -
"Frank Uriah Quillin, who wrote in his 1913 book The Color Line in Ohio: A History of Race Prejudice in a Typical Northern State: 'Columbus, the capital of Ohio, has a feeling toward the negroes all its own. In all my travels in the state, I found nothing just like it. It is not so much a rabid feeling of prejudice against the negroes simply because their skin is black as it is a bitter hatred for them.'"[1][2]

References

  1. ^ Oliphint, Joel. "Cover: The roots of Columbus' ongoing color divide". Columbus Alive.
  2. ^ Himes, J. S. (1942). "Forty Years of Negro Life in Columbus, Ohio". The Journal of Negro History. 27 (2): 133–154. doi:10.2307/2714730. ISSN 0022-2992. JSTOR 2714730. S2CID 149546155.
Bluerasberry (talk) 12:48, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:GNG, there is no guarantee 2 sources will be considered enough. I guess it could happen, if they are great on-topic sources with extensive coverage etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:16, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing notable about racism in Columbus Ohio. Was racism in Columbus more notable than Birmingham Alabama? Racism occurs everywhere, that doesnt make it particularly notable here. There may be a case for History of African-Americans in Columbus, Ohio, as suggested above, but this aint it. Metallurgist (talk) 20:09, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GNG. 71.231.11.148 (talk) 05:36, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This IP appears to be blocked for vandalism and the vote ought to be discarded or removed. Metallurgist (talk) 17:22, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:01, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Bluerasberry above: "As you say, we have articles covering distinct aspects. These include racism in Columbus Ohio for housing discrimination, police, protest events, tourism, and social justice programs. There is no source which combines all of these into a unifying narrative." ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:36, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dynasties of Ahirs

[edit]
Dynasties of Ahirs (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 a WP:COATRACK of loosely connected dynasties, many of which lack reliable scholarly consensus linking them to the Ahir community. The references often fail WP:RS & some are misused to support fringe or WP:UNDUE historical claims...also fails WP:V, and WP:SYNTH. Chronos.Zx (talk) 15:32, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 18:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Berber raid against Vandals

[edit]
Berber raid against Vandals (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 fails WP:GNG and relies on passing mentions that hardly mention the so-called raid at all. Skitash (talk) 13:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2031 in rail transport

[edit]
2031 in rail transport (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)

Way too early to have an article here, a lot of these events are very likely to change and this ends up being a WP:CRYSTALBALL. Sophisticatedevening🐞(talk) 19:21, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete Eventually this will be largely deleted anyway and replaced by a list of things that actually occurred in that year, most of which will not be facility openings. Public works projects are notoriously subject to delays, especially when we're talking six years out. Some will take place on time, and some will be delayed into a later year, and some will never be completed. If we are going to keep this, then I think we would have to add to all the schedule failures, " but that didn't happen." But it would be better to wait until 2031 and record what actually happened. Mangoe (talk) 02:56, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Mangoe. The article is not full of verifiable anticipated events, almost certain to take place, as anyone who follows public transport development projects with interest glumly knows. Delays are frequent and inevitable. What was planned for 2028 gets pushed back to 2031, and then to 2034... far-future articles like this aren't practical. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 05:57, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - too far in future for any reliable predictions.--Staberinde (talk) 08:58, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Mangoe. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:34, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Khasa dynasty and Kings

[edit]
List of Khasa dynasty and Kings (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)

Needless fork of Khasa Kingdom. Good content could be merged. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:46, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

khasa kingdom is different , and the kingdom who ruled by khasa race is different Imperial khasah (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The nomination is clearly in error. It's not a subtopic or fork of Khasa Kingdom. Khasa Kingdom was a specific kingdom in a specific place in a specific time period, which the list article claims would be but one entry in it, the Khasa people having established many kingdoms in various places throughout history. Per WP:AGF, I would suggest seeking a review from an expert (or working with the article creator and/or any experienced editor with access to all the sources) before moving to delete. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:05, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:TNT, absolutely terrible article that is an embarassment to Wikipedia. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:14, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:38, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – does not seem like a fork to me, as 'K Kingdom' is a political entity, while list lists rulers of a particular ethnicity. (List is pretty confusing though, maybe oughtta follow other 'Lists of monarchs' format with dynasties/houses being just a column in a single table/list of rulers?) – Asdfjrjjj (talk) 19:06, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that WP:TNT is not a policy-supported deletion criterion, but an essay about rewriting an article about a notable topic. Notability is determined by sourcing, not by the quality of the prose here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:45, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bicoli State

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

I don't feel this article meets the general English Wikipedia's notability criteria (WP:GNG). The subject of the article is not widely known, and its status is merely a local government subordinate to the higher Sultanate of Tidore, with territorial changes that may not exist, or are unclear, and there is no evidence that it ever became an independent entity in its own right (WP:GEOLAND). The sources cited also don't go into much detail about the state, Most of the material comes from only one source, and is not found in other sources, or other sources do not discuss this state. ▪︎ Fazoffic ( ʖ╎ᓵᔑ∷ᔑ) 10:27, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 11:11, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:52, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Caaqil Dheryodhoobe

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

I nominated this a few years ago, and the article still doesn't show sourcing in RS. I can't find any in Gbooks or Scholar about this person. Oaktree b (talk) 23:10, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Moritoriko's sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 23:17, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. No consensus in the first AFD, it looks like another No consensus closure.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:51, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History Proposed deletions

[edit]

History categories

[edit]

for occasional archiving

Proposals

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Social_science&oldid=1302324228"