Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Èrs people


 * 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. qedk (t 桜 c) 06:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Èrs people

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I believe I am the original author of this, embarrassingly, and it is a bit painful to nominate my own page for deletion, but I made it at a time when I was unaware of the differences between Soviet and Western historiography, and the problems inherent in the former. Sadly, it's overwhelmingly based on the work of the Circassian ethnologist (not linguist) Amjad Jaimoukha, with a few nods to Zimansky and Starostin. While the analysis is interesting, I have come to realize it is far, far out of line of mainstream discussion in Western circles (which to be fair do not even discuss the topic). Hopefully one day scholars will resume this topic. But until then, I don't think it has the necessary notability. Calthinus (talk) 16:39, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Calthinus (talk) 16:39, 16 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment -- I cannot oppose this, but would comment that place names are potentially a valid historical source in dealing with distant times. On the other hand, my immediate reaction was there was far too much from a single source.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:09, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I would absolutely welcome an attempt by someone with access to relevant sources to rescue this, or move it into their user space. Most of the relevant Soviet work is in Russian -- those are the works that Jaimoukha is referencing, aside from the Georgian Chronicles (but as I and Kober discovered, sometimes Jaimoukha's reading of Vakhushti's chronicles is not perfect; he speaks not Georgian but Circassian/Russian/Arabic so he reads translations). I took this work seriously when I was younger, because I was unaware of the systematic issues with Soviet historiography. Some relevant and more recent/reputable work likely also exists in Georgian but I can neither read nor type it. Back when this page was made -- when I also watched Naruto, guess my age then, hint 13 is too high -- I thought I was being helpful. Pinging some who might be able to help with making a respectable revived version ultimately : . --Calthinus (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment -- In know next to nothing of this subject but occasionally a theory now regarded as incorrect is notable enough to need an article. Clearly the article needs the attention of an expert.  Peterkingiron (talk) 12:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:GNG. The article depends on just one source. AFAIK, this hypothesis is not further discussed or elaborated in other sources. Therefore, it does meet the criteria for a standalone. As an alternative for deletion, we could merge and redirect somewhere, but then, we also have to check for WP:UNDUE and WP:FRINGE. Not everything that has been proposed somewhere at some time has to be mentioned in WP. There should be at least a certain degree of scholarly impact. However, at the current state of the article, I cannot see that. Even after 10 years, all other citations in the article are about circumstantial information, but not about "Èrs people". –Austronesier (talk) 12:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per GNG. Also delete Èrsh language. Senegambianamestudy (talk) 10:38, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree about deleting Èrsh language as well. Do we need an extra AfD for that, or is there some kind of bulk procedure? –Austronesier (talk) 11:17, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, you can do a mass nomination or nominate them separately. Alternatively, I think the nom can edit their deletion rationale above and mention it for mass deletion. Senegambianamestudy (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree with that too. --Calthinus (talk) 04:36, 20 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Would a refactor make sense, to change this to an article about the historiography? Commentary on where the legend came from, what it meant, what it means now, etc. That would also head off potential future remakes. Or has anyone even cared enough to do that, and all that really exists is this one source's words on the subject and no commentary on it? If that's the case then yeah, nuke it. --Golbez (talk) 19:27, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, it is not a legend, but just a modern scholarly construct based on bold etymologizing. –Austronesier (talk) 09:29, 21 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:TNT. We all have made mistakes. Bearian (talk) 17:16, 22 February 2020 (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.