Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1390 SH


 * 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. Fram (talk) 15:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

1390 SH

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A particular year in a particular calendar is not appropriate for a separate encyclopedia article. The article for that calendar is sufficient. Listing all the people who died during this year is ridiculous. Fails WP:GNG -MJH (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note – Similar articles 1391 SH and 1434 AH are also nomiated see Articles for deletion/1391 SH & Articles for deletion/1434 AH &#9733;&#9734; DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 01:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, although I feel I should point out that every year in the Gregorian calendar has its own article, with a list of the people who died that year... But, of course, it would be silly to create duplicate year articles for every obscure calendar, and 2012 in Iran would be a more appropriate place to list these particular deaths. DoctorKubla (talk) 09:07, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 23:48, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:02, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 21:13, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Comment Anglo-centric much? What makes Gregorian calendar years notable, but this Iranian calendar year not notable?  I would like to entertain the idea of closing all of the discussions opened on these and having a community RfC on determining the notability of these calendars. Ryan Vesey 23:06, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Change to redirect. Make the article redirect to 2011 or 2012. Andrew (talk) 03:10, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Hamedvahid (talk) 07:45, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:53, 30 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete it makes no sense to have redundant systems listing events that took place in the large number of extant calendar systems, and the Gregorian calendar is the most widely used calendar globally, especially in English speaking countries (our target audience). Some sort of redirect to a page listing conversions would also be acceptable. Hut 8.5 20:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: per the rationale given above and at Articles for deletion/1434 AH. הסרפד  (call me “Hasirpad”) (formerly R——bo) 02:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Again, I agree with Hut's comments. Redundant and not standard. Mkdw talk 03:37, 7 January 2013 (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.