Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Manacaud


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  11:56, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Battle of Manacaud

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

None of the sources mention it by the name "Battle of Manacaud." Furthermore, the article does not meet the criteria of WP:GNG and lacks sufficient coverage in WP:RS. Only a few sources, mostly failing WP:RAJ and WP:AGEMATTERS, mention it in fragmented lines. Imperial [AFCND]  10:40, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:36, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is one of many highly questionable articles about battles, where even the most basic details can't be verified. GraziePrego (talk) 00:52, 19 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Tehonk (talk) 02:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Sadustu Tau (talk) 13:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete or Draftify. The one and only source on this page is by Indian historian A. Sreedhara Menon and this source only has 9 lines of paragraph which shows that such a battle did occur but that's about it. It's just an overview from source and not enough detail. Everything else on the article page cannot be verified and seems self opinionated. Why I did vote for Draftify as well is to let the editor rework on the page by referencing more reliable sources while this nomination is in progress. RangersRus (talk) 15:31, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I tried to find sources for this article and barely found few, most of them are not WP:RS, falls under WP:RAJ or AGEMATTERS. And the fact that there is no Mughal records about this makes it more concerning. Imperial  [AFCND]  16:24, 19 February 2024 (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.