Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Balhara

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 keep. (As the dab/surname page) Sam Walton (talk) 21:20, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Balhara

Balhara (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

The page belongs to Category:Jat clans, or one of its subcategories. All the pages of these categories lack the very basic notability guidelines. Failure WP:GNG. Must discussed and deleted per WP:NOT. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:51, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:51, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:51, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as the surname list that it now is. The clan was indeed going to fail GNG but the nominator is well aware that we convert to surname lists where this is a possible alternative. That's what I did, somehow missing the fact that the thing had been nominated here. - Sitush (talk) 16:40, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I don't know about converting to a "surname list" without using that in the title; Balhara (surname). I would like some input on the concern of this being a "surname list" article as opposed to clan or just a "name" article. However, obviously a surname in at least 4 countries, without a doubt, and also a clan in India and possibly Pakistan, so there should be mention. There is evidence that Balhara (shown also as Bahara), is an ancient Hindu dynasty that ruled in Gujerat (The Cyclopædia of India and of Eastern and Southern Asia ..., Volume 1 page 230). As a set index article it seems to serve a purpose since there is named content. The DAB page states "an ethnic group of people in India.". There appears to me some etymology that the name means "King of kings", Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency ..., Volume 1, Part 2 - page 17 to 23. Otr500 (talk) 02:17, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• You are quoting Raj sources - we do not use them, per WP:HISTRS, numerous discussions at WP:RSN, the info at User:Sitush/CasteSources, etc. And it is plain daft to cite the description on a dab page in support of it being a clan - the dab only exists because of the article. No need to add "(surname)" to the title if it is the only article using the name: plenty of examples of recent conversions by other people that follow this example & the parenthetical dab word content is redundant. - Sitush (talk) 07:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So no sources considered "Raj" are acceptable at all under any circumstances?

I am not a fan of parenthetical disambiguation, but it does sometimes have a use, and I mentioned that be cause many, many set index article (lists) do use it and "plenty of examples of recent conversions by other people" doesn't necessarily mean a lot. Would this reference, or this one, be considered reliable to support content. Otr500 (talk) 12:01, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete & redirect to Balhara (disambiguation), and list the notable persons there. No sources have been provided at this AfD that it's needed a clan, and per WP:V that is not allowed. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:18, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As there's no primary topic here, there's no need to add the tag "(disambiguation)", as per WP:DABNAME. In fact, according to WP:DABNAME, Balhara (disambiguation) should be redirected to Balhara. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:24, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as the dab page it now is. And having kept it, redirect Balhara (disambiguation) to this base name. (It should never have existed, as the old page at Balhara should have had a hatnote directing to Kingdom of Balhara, and those are the only two entries on the dab page). PamD 11:44, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment it complicates matters when people do such drastic edits on a page in the middle of an AfD process. "Convert to dab page" as a !vote would be clearer: let the AfD discuss an article which has at least some resemblance to the page as nominated. PamD 11:44, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Had the nominator followed WP:BEFORE, it would've saved the time of many good-faith users here. In any case, you can't blame others for doing the obvious thing. - NitinMlk (talk) 15:51, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as dab/surname page clan non-notable. Boleyn (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2016 (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.