Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ukur

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. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 12:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ukur

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Literally gets a sentence fragment in the cited source ([1]), which does not itself cite any sources. Boy, that's helpful, isn't it? I wasn't able to find any other reliable sources on a search, including of JSTOR. Happy to withdraw if there are sources that I didn't find, but I'm dubious here. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mythology-related deletion discussions. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not in my dictionary of mythology. However, This search (Ukur + mythology) returns results. Nonetheless, this is lazy work, absolutely no redeeming features here, no go. No reliable sources, and its not our job to do the work. Delete. --Whiteguru (talk) 11:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I've just had a quick peek at those, but none of them seem (at a skim!) to be referring to a god of the underworld. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:14, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Whiteguru most of your list reasons for delete "this is lazy work, absolutely no redeeming features here, no go. No reliable sources, and its not our job to do the work." are not reasons to delete per WP:BEFORE C.1. "If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD." You are correct that we are not obligated to correct the article, but if it is fixable, we should not be deleting it. Jeepday (talk) 18:54, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't find anything to meet WP:GNG for this topic. As Premeditated Chaos says the alternate search does not show anything to support the article. Jeepday (talk) 18:54, 4 February 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.