Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Chamkaur (1764)

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. Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 09:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Chamkaur (1764)[edit]

[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)

Extremely unreliable sources including over-reliance on primary sources that still fall under WP:RAJ such as Panth Prakash, also extremely exaggerated in numbers (1 million?) Noorullah (talk) 22:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, India, and Punjab. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:21, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Over the past year, these topic areas have been inundated with poorly written and sourced articles that paid no heed to neutrality, proper sourcing, or historical accuracy, but rather on aggrandizing their religion as much as possible. Tactics included an over reliance on primary sources and ref spamming Google books snippets or sources which only made negligible mention of topic at hand. This article is one of the many, many examples. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 03:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing but another article that is backed by religious texts, that too falls under WP: AGEMATTERS. Not found any RS calling this by the Name "Battle of Chamkaur"--Imperial ^[AFCND] 06:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge to Jassa_Singh_Ahluwalia#Military_campaigns. Raj era source is if it's written by Britons or Briton diplomats and administrators or under the guidance and review of Briton administrators like Lepel Griffin, Michael MacAuliffe, Sir John Withers McQueen. The page is attributed from one source and it does not attest if it was a battle. Not every minor encounter, fight or confrontation needs to have a page on it. RangersRus (talk) 12:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete falls under WP:RAJ, WP:AGEMATTERS, maybe also WP:GNG. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:53, 2 May 2024 (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.