Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pahore

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. This RSN discussion is highly relevant: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 172#Are British Raj ethnographers unreliable?. This page is unsuitable for a redirect/merge unless we have actual reliable sources to confirm either Rajput or Parmar as suitable targets. Thank you to 86.17.222.157 for linking that. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:23, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pahore

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

I couldn't find any academic sources mentioning the topic via Google Books. Unremarkable, fails WP:N JudeccaXIII (talk) 06:44, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:48, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:48, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not convinced one way or the other at this point, but [1] seems to a fairly respectable mention. (This is cited in the article as "Glossary of Tribes and Castes"; see A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province. CapitalSasha ~ talk 17:10, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That book, like others on the topic published in the era of the British Raj, is by no means a reliable source, being a mixture of scientific racism and divide and rule. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 172#Are British Raj ethnographers unreliable? for futher information. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 08:22, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough, I did not look closely at the book. CapitalSasha ~ talk 22:45, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:52, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and redirect to Rajput ^{Atsme📞📧} 00:53, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why redirect? Do we have a reliable source that even says that this is a Rajput clan? Many of these articles, and no evidence has been given that this is any different, are simply about a family tradition rather than anything that belongs in an encyclopedia, even as a redirect. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 22:00, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What are your thoughts about this? ^{Atsme📞📧} 00:04, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There don't seem to be sny significant sources giving substantial coverage. Breaking sticks (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Parmar per [[2]]. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:10, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I have already explained above that is not a reliable source. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 07:48, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide proof. Otherwise, a merge and redirect is the best option. And you'd be better off down the road having a real user name. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:06, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I linked a discussion at the reliable sources noticeboard above. And my choice to reveal my IP address when editing is irrelevant to this discussion. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 09:21, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not seeing how racism and ethnocentricity applies in this case. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:58, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's all explained in that noticeboard discussion, which was triggered by this very book. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 15:24, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Super confusing, does not looks notable and no reliable sources are cited for this. Not sure what the context of such an article would be either.Huitzilopochtli1990 (talk) 07:35, 5 November 2017 (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.