Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tintanga Estate

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. While further discussion would be the ideal, the discussion so far has been swamped by the author's sockpuppets. The prevailing legitimate opinion seems delete. Cabayi (talk) 13:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tintanga Estate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:GNG to exist as a seperate article. One or two source have just passing mention. While other source are just talking another context and the author has used them to enlarge the article and show that it has a lot of source. As for example:[1] this one, which only talks about Zamindari abolition and donot mention this estate at all but kept here with other source, a kind of WP:SYNTH. It should be deleted and if someone is interested could keep a brief summary about this state in Yadav clans related articles, and many other such Yadav estate which have very few sources could also be included in that, instead of writing many stubs which can't be expanded due to paucity of sources.

• Other issues:
  • [2], this is a WP:SPS or an advertising website, I don't know ?
    
  • [3] this is also not worthy of being used at Wikipedia.
  • 
    [4] look at this, its also a spurious source.
  • 
    [5], this is also some kind of advertisement website.
    Rest two or three source also have just passing refrence or may not have any.
• Heba Aisha (talk) 06:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Heba Aisha (talk) 06:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep : Rather than deleting it, I suggest it to be converted into a STUB article, as 'one of the estates of yadav community'. Ramesh mishra (talk) 02:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC) Confirmed sockpuppet; Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HindustaniHindu Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC) [reply]
• The user Heba Aisha is Targeting Yadav community and trying to vandalise and delete pages related to them so please don’t delete the page HinduataniHindu Blocked for sockpuppetry. Heba Aisha (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC) — Preceding undated comment added 12:24, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Hindustanihindu, accusing other users by any means without valid proof is considered as personal attack and will have serious consequences. You should discuss the matter with Heba Aisha in their talk page. Regards.Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 13:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: agree with the nominator that it fails WP:GNG to exist as a separate article. defcon5 (talk) 14:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Don't delete:Proper reference about gop transport, chulai gop and Maheshwari brothers are present check it out firstRamesh mishra 21:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • CU-confirmed sock ([6]). Blablubbs|talk 17:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I have worked very hard on this article finded images added it added sources I am not a very experienced user so some of my reference may be unsuitable but I have many information,books,journals available offline about Tintanga Estate I am not able to find those online as soon as I will get it I will add them till then article has been added in stub I will expand it soon with proper citations and sources so please I request admin not to delete it Hindustani 9:53 16 April (UTC) blocked for sockpuppetry. Heba Aisha (talk) 17:12, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Don't delete proper citations have been added user:Ramesh mishra Naugachia Confirmed sockpuppet; Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HindustaniHindu Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- I note that the article has been moved, since being nominated. I do not know enough of India to know how significant zemindars were. However, if they were signficant before 1947, changes made subsequently would not alter that. This is a question of scale. Some estates (or captaincies) will be large enough to be notable; others will not. The article has a significnat number of referneces; I cannot judge whether they are RS. Hardcopy only references are just as valid as on-line ones, sometimes more so. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I am aware, but hard copy sources are also not in enough quantity. These are actually small villages, which are dubbed by creators as estates, they have only minor references available , just passing one in few sources. Most of sources used here actually do the same, some even don't mention. Heba Aisha (talk) 08:56, 19 April 2021 (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.