Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadelakandy

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. Jujutacular (talk) 05:05, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nadelakandy[edit]

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

Not sure The Amazing Spiderman (talk) 17:42, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Move to DRAFT space. This article does not come close to meeting the standards for writing and sourcing. It also is unclear as to how much of it is original research (and, in this regard, note that the lengthy external link that had been deleted was to a Google collection of photographs, and not to any written material). Then again, maybe this really is a sourcble part of the history of Sri Lanka. Moving it into Draft space will give the article's creator time to improve the article. NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:14, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the article was tagged for possible hoax, no refs, and general problems, and the tags were removed by the creator/editor within minutes. I'm guessing that this is someone who is unfamiliar with WP editing practices and generally with how things work. I'll !vote move to draft, or delete with the caveat that the creator has to agree to work through AfC to learn more about WP and editing. LaMona (talk) 23:15, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there are no references supplied that come close to verifying any of the information provided in the article. I have tried searching for any information remotely related to the subject and am unable to find anything. In its current form the article should be deleted. Dan arndt (talk) 02:38, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 02:38, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 02:38, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft and userfy if this can happen as I simply see no improvement for this and if that can happen later, we can see if it is acceptable for mainspace then. SwisterTwister talk 04:40, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:59, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Almost completely made up stuff aimed at ethnic glorification. Unable to find any sources. utcursch | talk 03:56, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Don't see the need to userfy what looks like the usual clan stuff/OR/glorification. Drmies (talk) 03:37, 17 October 2015 (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.