Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kachwaha Dynasty (Dhanchoha)

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. WP:SNOW closure. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:55, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kachwaha Dynasty (Dhanchoha)[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)

Fails WP:V. ∯WBG^converse 05:11, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:08, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:08, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:09, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - very well charted family tree in a large image filling most of the article, however no sources for any of this nor does it seem this is notable (in this spelling at least) per my BEFORE. Icewhiz (talk) 07:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Appears to be a personal genealogy and therefore fails WP:NOTGENEALOGY, and probably also WP:OR. We do have an article on the Kachwaha Rajput. However, the only leader mentioned by name is Bharmal who does not appear on the chart. I've tried searching on gbooks for the founder named on the chart, Darihal Singh, but turned up nothing. The chart gives no dates, so I disagree with "very well charted"; it is not possible to put those names in an historical context. SpinningSpark 09:50, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NOTGENEALOGY and unsourced. unable to find sources either. Also agree with contributors above. --DBig Xrayᗙ 09:57, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per previous votes. Knightrises10 (talk) 13:57, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I raised concerns about this article at WT:INB. I cannot find any sources and it appears to be some sort of vanity project, perhaps by a member of the family who created the family tree image. They removed a CSD template soon after it was created but have never returned to Wikipedia. - Sitush (talk) 02:03, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- It's rather unfair to bring up that long irrelevant CSD. It was nominated as an A4 (no content) one hour after creation. The user, quite reasonably, removed the template when he added, well, content. SpinningSpark 16:48, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It clearly personal personal genealogy and therefore fails WP:NOTGENEALOGY, and probably also WP:OR.The geneology is also not of any relevance in Indian history and the only valid name is Rajput.Vinodbasker (talk) 16:34, 4 October 2018 (UTC)*[reply]
Delete - fails V, searching for names on the tree I also failed to find anything encyclopedic. Smmurphy^(Talk) 12:45, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in a hurry. "Rajput" itself is a dubious category: sometime in the early- or mid medieval age in western India some low-caste warrior tribes had sought higher caste status (Kshatriya) from the local rulers they had helped earlier. They were granted the status, and since then mythic histories have been made of them as Rajputs, not just in Rajasthan, where they went on to become rulers, but also in the rest of India, where anyone who is claiming that caste status also has a story of migration. This page is that kind of garbage. Speedy deletion. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 03:09, 7 October 2018 (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.