Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baharlu dynasty


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:22, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Baharlu dynasty

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * "www.royalark.net." is clearly not a reliable source, no better than Medlands.
 * "persian.packhum.org." has a link which give 404 source error.
 * Minorsky, V. (1955-01-01). *"The Qara-qoyunlu and the Qutb-shāhs (Turkmenica, 10)". Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. 17 (1): 50–73. makes  no  mention of Bairam Khwaja, it makes 3 mentions of Baharlu, stating that Quli Qutb Mulk a Baharlu Turk, but no mention of Bairam Khwaja or Golconda(pre-1518) and the other two mention how Pirquli bek is a Baharlu Turk, which still does not connect them to Bairam Khwaja.
 * Yılmaz., Öztuna, (1990-01-01). Devletler ve hânedanlar. v. 3 : İlk çağ ve Asya-Afrika devletleri. Kültür Bakanlığı. ISBN 9789751704696. OCLC 25218865.is a world cat file.
 * https://www.azadliq.info/32202.html---translated via google, makes no mention of Golconda in 1374 or Bairam Khwaja
 * Also, Bosworth (New Islamic Dynasties) makes no mention of a Baharlu dynasty, but under Qutb Shahis(p.328) calls the founding sultan Quli Khawass Khan Baharlu, Qutb al-Mulk'.

Hence, unfortunately, this article is nothing but a fairy tale. - LouisAragon (talk) 11:22, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 17:29, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Note - this is not a fairy tale, but I do have my concerns. The Baharlu/Barani connection to Kara Koyunlu is easy to source. The connection to Quli Qutb Mulk and Sultanate of Golconda is present in our article stating Qara Yusuf as an ancestor (but off the same bulletin), and is evidenced in some sources (which I'm less sure of their quality - but it does seem to repeat). The Oudh State line seems connected to Golconda - but I'll admit I did not try to source that - and this particular connection seems tenuous (per our article -  was Qutbshah's 4th cousin 2 times removed.....). So - at least parts of this article pass WP:V - so its not all a fairy tale. My concern, is WP:SYNTH - while there seems to be some sort of established connection to the Kara Koyunlu and Baharlu (at least for Golconda) - it is not clear anyone refers to the connection as a "dynasty". Absent a clear source that does, I'm leaning delete.Icewhiz (talk) 16:29, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The Baharlu's and the Kara Koyunlu existed and those connections are verifiable as well, but there was simply no Baharlu dynasty. That's why this article, is a fairy tale (i.e. something that doesn't/didn't exist in reality). Unfortunately, there's just no WP:RS that makes mention of a so-called "Baharlu dynasty". - LouisAragon (talk) 22:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment -- This is a horrid article without appropriate links, but Oudh State contains some material linking its dynasty with Kara Koyunlu. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - My reading of sources found at google books, the Baharlu/Barani tribe tribe is an interesting and encyclopedic subject. But I don't see that it should be called a dynasty in wikipedia's voice. It is a dynasty in the sense that something like royalark means it to be. That is, the ruling family came from this tribe and held this name. But a wikipedia article about this group should be about the tribe. The article List of rulers of Kara Koyunlu could do better to trace the relationships between the rulers, but I don't see any research that gives a single dynastic name to them. A redirect to List of rulers of Kara Koyunlu could be considered, I think, but I'm not sure it would be necessary/useful. Smmurphy(Talk) 02:40, 15 June 2018 (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.