Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jahangiri

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 delete. ✗plicit 14:42, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jahangiri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

With numerous "citation needed" and "dubious" tags, and 2 references which are vague, this article provides me with more questions than answers. Is there enough verifiable material here to salvage it, or does the article amount to WP:OR? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:08, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 13:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - a lot of the disputed information was entered in this edit here: [1] by an IP editor. Rather than reverting, another editor immediately added the dubious tags. I would suggest we could just delete the dubious statements added in that edit, although it doesn't leave much. The Jahangiri dynasty gets a mention here [2] although that book doesn't shout "reliable source". This book [3] says In India's collective memory Jahangir is a little more than an insignificant man that ruled between his father Akbar the Great, a military and political colossus and his son Shah Jahan the builder of the famous Taj Mahal of Agra. but I don't have the book to check if this is the correct Jahangir dynasty - it seems unlikely as Jahangir, father of Shah Jahan ruled 1605-1627, which is later than where this page once put this dynasy; It is clear from the original page created on WP that the term is historical [4] but allegedly 1190-1520, although there were never any sources. The dynasty is linked with those dates from List of Sunni dynasties and also List of Muslim states and dynasties. Searches are complicated by the fact that this is a surname so many false hits. I am not an expert in this matter, but it seems likely to me that there was a Jahangiri dynasty (as the page originally said, and probably spanning the original dates, and regional) but it never had good sources and it is unclear how significant the dynasty was. Then the unsourced page was edited in a fairly uncontrolled manner until it said something that is certainly untrue. What we have is a mess, but I cannot say that the subject fails WP:GNG - someone better versed in the history of the period and location and able to speak languages that better sources may be in, may well find significant coverage. I suspect it could exist. What I can say is that the page as it stands is so very wrong that there is nothing worth saving here. I thus think this is a prime article for a bit of WP:TNT. The existence of a red link in List of Sunni dynasties would then, hopefully, encourage a subject expert to begin again on this, and this time hopefully with some sources. WP:TNT should be used sparingly but in this case I think it will improve the wikipedia project. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:46, 29 August 2022 (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.