This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Punjab. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Punjab|~~~~}} 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.
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 Punjab. 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 Asia.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
NC less than a year ago but given that two editors have since been blocked, It think Asif needs another look. I'm unable to find evidence she meets N:ACTOR. StarMississippi01:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Good catch. The last AFD was closed as non-consensus due to socks, despite it being a clear delete at the time. A year later, I still don’t see how this meets NACTOR. Those claiming it meets NACTOR need to realize that simply stating it isn’t enough and it falls under WP:ATA therefore they must demonstrate how the subject meets NACTOR. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:41, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:NACTOR says "may be considered notable" based on roles, not "is considered notable" (my emphasis). We still need the significant coverage and I cannot find enough to show notability.— Preceding unsigned comment added by CNMall41 (talk • contribs)
General comment: The essay WP:ATA is indeed rather interesting to read, it recommends not to cite a guideline without explaining why one thinks a subject meets its requirement. For ex. ’See WP: XXX" not good. But "Meets Wp:XXX because YYY", good (especially if one adds sources). Can also apply to certain delete !votes, btw, :D-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)20:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is a clear case of WP:SYNTH. Google Books provide no results at all for "Northern Campaign of Raghunath Rao" or the original title "Northern Conquest of Raghunath Rao". The editor has arbitrarily linked various battles of his own choice into a single conflict, not supported by any RS. Also, note that the orginal creator has been banned for sockpuppetry, and multiple sockpuppets have often tried to restore the article after other editors redirected the page. PadFoot (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; clearly lacks notability as a singular subject. Much of the content fails verification and tries to blow out of proportion the historical significance of the events involving the winning states, as is typical with these socks. Noting to @Crashed greek that PadFoot was merely restoring the "backdoor deletion" rightly done by Sitush in October 2023 but repeatedly undone without just reason by socks. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 00:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The article creator appears to be connected with an advertising agency and writes in a promotional style. Notability has not been demonstrated. Deb (talk) 08:40, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CommentBastun, as you said, a draft exist for this, so why not put in a history merger template before an AFD? Even if it goes through not, at least give it a try! Intrisit (talk) 16:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is still a famous and most respected personality of Asia adding his profile on Wikipedia is very much appropriate and knowledgeful for Wikipedians and otherwise. His contributions deserve to be appreciated by Wikipedia etc. Emmay33 (talk) 09:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody is saying there can't be an article. The problem is the language and grammar are currently too poor to publish. The article can be improved in draft space, then get moved to main article space. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!10:37, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep he was a notable lawyer and a law professor per some of the sources in the article. AFD is not a place for article cleanup but to delete articles falling below notability thresh hold. What this article needs is cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's editorial guidelines. Piscili (talk) 14:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Notability is not at issue. The subject is absolutely worthy of an article. Agreed, AfD is not a place for article cleanup. Draftspace is. This article is not currently fit for article mainspace though - a lot of what's there makes literally no sense - sorry to be harsh, but some is just gibberish. But the article can't be moved to draft space because there is already a draft article there, and nobody bothered going through WP:AFC, they just copied and pasted back to a mainspace article. If the article is kept, I will be removing a lot of the content that makes no sense, the unsourced, and the hagiographic and unencyclopedic. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!09:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Histmerge to draft then delete: Looks to be a copy-paste fork from the draft. Needs significant language work, which is an appropriate use of draftspace. UtherSRG(talk)11:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
