Talk:Barha Tegin

Proposed merge of Barha Tegin into Turk Shahis
Should Barha Tegin be merged into Turk Shahis? TrangaBellam (talk) 19:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Support Every bit of information is already covered at the target in a far better context. WP:DUP#2 applies, even if the most conservative reading is applied. We know nothing significant about these rulers apart from two or three factoids (at best or nil, at worst) to flesh out standalone articles. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Friendly Oppose It is a normal process on Wikipedia to create pages on significant rulers. Often they will be expanded and become quite interesting over time. If not, they at least respond to the curiosity of the Wikipedia reader who wants information about this specific ruler. The information is also much easier to find when linking from another page (your xxxxxxx#yyyyyyyyyy types of links get broken over time with the slightest editorial change, they just don't work in the long run, and if you link to the whole master page it's a pain to find the relevant information). The main criteria for existence of a page is Notability, not the fact that information is limited or could be found or inserted somewhere else. The master page usually is better off summarizing content, while the sub-page can have all the details. Best पाटलिपुत्र  Pat  (talk) 19:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * My reply remains same: onlookers can consult this thread :) TrangaBellam (talk) 20:38, 12 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose different personalities. Should we merge bunch of stubs with other stuff? These articles are ok. Beshogur (talk) 16:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Noting the close with no merge following this edit. Klbrain (talk) 06:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Kuwayama
You forgot to copy the source from Turk Shahis. Citations to Kuwayama do not work :) TrangaBellam (talk) 15:47, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Ziad (2022)
But how do I convince well-meaning folks to stop creating articles for every single name they come across in scholarship? , fyi. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:57, 2 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Well, many sources have many things to say about Barhategin, and Ziad is one of them. I think his opinion definitely has its place in the article. But it does not in itself suggest that the article should not exist, quite the contrary actually, since he does discuss the matter extensively. It is fine to have some level of doubt about the existence of Barhategin, or about the indentity of the first Turk Shahi ruler. पाटलिपुत्र  Pataliputra  (talk) 17:18, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Gyselen (2010) states the same but please keep on creating articles. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:48, 2 October 2022 (UTC)