Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vietnamese nobility

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Although keeps do predominate, genuine concerns of notability and verifiability of its notability have been raised. slakr^\ talk / 23:28, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnamese nobility

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not sure the Annam Empire actually exists. Even if it did, this article should be merged into Vietnam, as it is non-notable due to the lack of secondary sources that support this "Annam Empire". 123chess456 (talk) 22:39, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I found some Google Book hits that do confirm that the Annam Empire existed, although from a cursory look, the mentions were short and, as you said, are not significant enough. Still, I'm withholding !voting because there could be source out there in Vietnamese, and we can't let systemic bias get in our way when it comes to sources. Perhaps ping a Vietnamese-speaking editor about this discussion. If no sources are found even in Vietnamese, ping me. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:13, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Annam is dealt with in History of Vietnam and Annam (French protectorate). Whether or not the content is accurate however I would not know. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:48, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Maybe the information could be incorporated here? PaintedCarpet (talk) 18:05, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔ 22:41, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article is at best an unreferenced stub. There's no loss to deleting this content as it can be re-created elsewhere. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the Trần dynasty existed, but without sourcing, this article fails WP:GNG. Bearian (talk) 16:34, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. "Annam" was the name of Vietnam from 1428(?) to 1945 (see Vietnam and see Annam (French protectorate)). The article serves a role already as parallel to Chinese nobility article. It seems like an obviously notable topic. It is a stub, yes and should be marked as such (implicitly calling for expansion). But there is no requirement that every stub have references. Pinging Narutolovehinata5. --do ncr am 02:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Doncram. However, it should probably still need sources; does anyone know what is the Vietnamese term for this so that possible sources are easier to find? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 03:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.An article about a country nobility is notable.User:Lucifero4 — Preceding undated comment added 21:34, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 16:18, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Doncram, IMHO it needs sourcing not deleting. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 16:20, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.