Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayya Singh Saini
- 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. Cirt (talk) 06:20, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mayya Singh Saini[edit]
- Mayya Singh Saini (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Fails the WikiProject Military biographical notability guidelines. Exactly zero hits on google[1], google scholar [2] and google books [3] (all hits refer to persons with the same name). Only statement of notability is that he appears at the Sikh Encyclopedia, which could be this book The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism or this website [4] (and it's broken atm, so I can't check it out). Sikhwiki list him only as a horseman, not as a commander [5] Enric Naval (talk) 01:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Does not in any way meet the General Notability Guidelines. It even says in the article itself, "It is not clear from the account available whether Mayya Singh was a commander or just an ordinary cavalryman." If there is no evidence that Mayya Singh was a commander and we have no reason to believe he was anything but a cavalryman, what reason could there possibly be for keeping this article? Singh as an individual did not have any historical significance, and so he does not have enough significance for his own article on Wikipedia. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 02:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Also note the creator has made substantial edits [6] (over 500?!) to the Saini article within the last few months, many of which appear to violate Wikipedia's NPOV and OR guidelines, which might lead one to suspect a conflict of interest with the subject matter. Is it possible for anybody to check up on the two book sources that are cited in the article? Themfromspace (talk) 02:15, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No claims giving rise to even hint of notability, let alone demonstration of notability under the general notability guidelines. See also the WikiProject Military biographical notability guidelines, for a topic-specific guideline that the subject also fails to meet. Bongomatic 02:17, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment He passes the General Notability Guideline if he has significant coverage in reliable sources such as history books. Unfortunately we don't have page numbers so perhaps it's unreasonable to ask anyone to attempt to verify those given. From google it does appear that the www.thesikhencyclopedia.com has (or had) an entry for him beginning "MAYYA SINGH, a Saini Sikh ofNaushahra in Amritsar district of the Punjab and a horseman of the Sikh army, fought in the battle of Ramnagar on 22 November " [7] Juzhong (talk) 15:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd rather follow the wikiproject guidelines on notability unless there is some good reason to skip them. Looking here, is there a good reason to have an article of him even if he's not "the primary topic of one or more published secondary works"? --Enric Naval (talk) 18:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Because by not deleting a topic which "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" you wouldn't be a bunch of cunts. Juzhong (talk) 23:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, the question is whether the coverage is "significant" or "trivial" or "more than trivial, but not enough to meet notability". --Enric Naval (talk) 18:00, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Because by not deleting a topic which "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" you wouldn't be a bunch of cunts. Juzhong (talk) 23:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd rather follow the wikiproject guidelines on notability unless there is some good reason to skip them. Looking here, is there a good reason to have an article of him even if he's not "the primary topic of one or more published secondary works"? --Enric Naval (talk) 18:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that Mayya Singh's refernece in found in Sikh Encycolopedia , edited by Harbans Singh, published by Punjabi University , Patiala. Please explain why a personality merits inclusion in one encyclopedia and does not merit inclusion in Wikipedia. Otherwise, it appears that notability tag is use arbitrarily. Presence of internet is not necessarily a validation of notability. Please see The Sikh Encycolopedia. The article will be expanded with more depth collaboratively as and when more primary sources become available.
- I gave an explanation of wikipedia's definition of notability here [8] --Enric Naval (talk) 18:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Include him in the appropriate article(s) first and redirect him there. I don't see evidence of his notability sufficient for a stand alone article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:40, 14 November 2008 (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.