Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aangaar (pashto)
Appearance
- 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. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:56, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- Aangaar (pashto) (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)
Wholly unreferenced article and therefore no claim to any notability. Inevitably fails WP:GNG Velella Velella Talk 18:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- It is also the creation of a blocked sockpuppet, so qualifies for CSD. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 18:31, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:38, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:38, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as nothing at all for the necessary notability improvements. SwisterTwister talk 06:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:24, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:24, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, as subject lacks requisite non-trivial coverage from reliable publications. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy delete As it falls under G5 as a creation by a banned or blocked user with no substantial content contributions from others. Note that it's already been nominated for speedy deletion several times but the template was removed by a now confirmed sockpuppet of the creator. Omni Flames let's talk about it 08:11, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete pr nom. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:59, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- 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.