Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aryan League


 * 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:50, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Aryan League

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This topic does not have significant coverage in reliable sources per WP:N. This article has been on Wikipedia since 2006 and has no references at all. Steve Quinn (talk) 22:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Keep - This is an issue of systemic bias. The sources are evidentially in Iranian.  I found one mention of them in this article:, so clearly they exist, and this article even mentions that they get coverage in Iranian newspapers, but they apparently don't get English language coverage.  This said, I do note that Aryan League frequently pops up news articles about the Aryan League of America, which probably deserves an article of its own, and a hatnote or disambiguation page.  The "Aryan League" was apparently also mentioned in at least one 1922 newspaper, so it may have more historical usage in relation to WWII and Nazi Germany as well.  Fieari (talk) 03:48, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Steve Quinn's arguments below have changed my mind. We can't have this article because we have no reliable information about the subject.  Until such time as we can find reliable information, the page should be deleted.  As I said before though, I certainly wouldn't object to an article with this name discussing the term from a 1922 german context, or as a redirect to an article on the American Aryan League. Fieari (talk) 07:20, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: Screw "systemic bias." WP:V is unambiguous -- if no qualifying sources can be found for a subject, then an article on that subject cannot be sustained.  We cannot just allege or speculate that sources discussing the subject in "significant detail" exist: they must be proven to exist, and presented for our review.  If you can't produce anything more than fleeting mentions, then you can't legitimately advocate keeping the article.   Ravenswing   12:51, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I provided a reference that referenced the existence of Iranian language sources. I can't read Iranian.  I can't search in Iranian.  But someone who can, and who is a reliable source, has done so for us.  It's only one fleeting reference, but it's a reference that establishes the existence of other references.  May I also ask that you calm down a little bit?  No need for hostility. Fieari (talk) 07:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm quite calm, thank you. I would suggest that if you're interested in a lack of hostility, suggesting that "systemic bias" is the source of this AfD is a poor method of setting that tone.  Certainly I would never advocate keeping an article without unambiguous proof -- not just supposition or speculation -- that qualifying sources exist.   Ravenswing   11:37, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I take "screw XXX" to be far more hostile than simply referencing WP:Systemic bias, an essay that seems to have a lot of support from fellow wikipedians. ("I don't agree with that essay" or "I think WP policy holds more weight" would have been less hostile, IMO).  Regardless, I think a larger amount of leeway should be allowable when sources are a combination of being likely to be in a language other than English, and less likely to be online. Fieari (talk) 23:41, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * And if you can win people over on the WP:V talk page to the premise that the core policy is suspended for subjects where sources are likely to be in foreign languages, fair enough.   Ravenswing   00:19, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment The link that is meant to be a source links to an article entitled "Blood Libel" and disparages the views of a Palestinian leader making a speech or speeches before representatives of the European Union . There is no mention of an Aryan League or Iranian language sources that discuss the Aryan League. Truthfully I don't think such an organization exits in Iran. I don't see how it could since Iran is very much a Muslim country and the Aryan League would be some sort of old time fascist organization that relies on beliefs that would seem to clash with the Muslim faith. To me it seems like an oxymoron. Without reliable sources I cannot see this as otherwise. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:12, 28 June 2016 (UTC).
 * This may have been the intended source: "Explaining Iran’s approach toward the Middle East "; (The Jerusalem Post. 2011-10-25). There is only passing mention of the Aryan League and it is still not clear if this group actually still exists. It may have faded away with the downfall of the Shah. In any case, only passing mention does not qualify as significant coverage. Also, I didn't see any Iranian language sources mentioned in this article. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:27, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, right now, I don't even know if this was, or is, a fascist group. Only this Wikipedia article says this, and I haven't found any sources to back that up either, never mind its existence. In Hindu scriptures, "Aryan" (Anglo-translation) refers to a heroic-leadership type person in ancient times. So this has a far different meaning and connotation in our modern times dating back to the rise of Hitler. So if there was an Aryan League in Iran at one time, the meaning could be leadership-heroic types before the rise of Hitler. So really, there is no way to nail down what this Wikipedia article is really about. It seems to be someone's wonderful (or not so wonderful) idea. In other words, original research WP:NOR. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:44, 28 June 2016 (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.