Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pradhan senadhipati

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. Randykitty (talk) 17:43, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Pradhan senadhipati

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Pradhan senadhipati (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

unsourced since 2006 and the article is merely about nepali translation of Commander-in-chief. –2A0A:A541:7239:0:DF2:49D2:C23F:73B4 (talk) 22:34, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

• Comment Completing nomination on behalf of IP editor. Above text is copied from article talk page. As for my own view, I'm no speaker of Nepali, but assuming nom's information is correct, some form of redirect seems preferable to outright deletion. --Finngall ^talk 23:38, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. --Finngall ^talk 23:41, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 02:34, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

• Comment. Unsourced since 2006 is not a valid rationale for deletion. Per WP:NEGLECT: Sometimes an article is nominated for deletion that is not being worked on very much, or has not been edited by a person for a long time, and thus might not be in very good shape. This does not necessarily mean that the topic is unsuitable for Wikipedia; it may be that the topic is obscure or difficult to write about. An article should be assessed based on whether it has a realistic potential for expansion, not how frequently it has been edited to date. Remember that there is no deadline. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:14, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

  Delete per Abecedare, given that there are no sources to support the claim. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:21, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

• Delete It is high time we deleted all unsourced articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:58, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
• Delete: A misconception might be "realistic potential for expansion" but notability is a main criterion for inclusion. Since I can assume that many readers or editors may not have the ability to access Nepali sources then someone needs to prove it. "Unsourced since 2006" would be valid on two points, 1)- it is unsourced, and 2)- it has flown under the radar for a long time but now this has been contested. A "PrettyPleaseWithACherryOnTop" keep reasoning is also ineffective. This issue involves the fundamental principles of Wikipedia. An argument that an unsourced article "might" improve Wikipedia, as a possible reason to "ignore the rules", and some editors seemingly alright with unsourced articles, does not currently enjoy broad community consensus so we generally follow the policies and guidelines. If an editor wishes to find at least one (more of course preferable) reliable independent source (not a primary only) and add it then ping me and I might consider changing my mind as well as possibly even others. Otr500 (talk) 05:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Pradhan as Pradhan senapati (field marshal) already does. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
• Delete Cannot verify current contents. Even the Nepal army website doesn't support the claims, and searching for online sources in Nepali language didn't find anything relevant. At a minimum, the article is outdated since monarchy was abolished in Nepal in 2008; at worst, it is spreading misinformation. Abecedare (talk) 23:10, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Note too that the article creator, to whom all the current content traces back to, was banned from wikipedia for creating false and fabricated sources and content. Abecedare (talk) 23:25, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
• Delete I cannot find any sourcing, and no one else has been able to either, apparently. Maybe it's real, but maybe it's a hoax and without being able to confirm, there isn't much I can say in support of keeping it. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 14:22, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

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.