Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khkhjakhkhja barg


 * 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  16:09, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Khkhjakhkhja barg

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

One single mention somewhere it's not enough to establish notability. Does not meet WP:NNEWSPAPER. XXN, 01:19, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 02:08, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 02:08, 25 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete not verifiable, possibly a hoax, could not find any other reference confirming this ever existed. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 02:11, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - I... also think this may be a hoax. The entire language is spoken by 150k people, and centered about 2k miles from St. Petersburg. Even if this actually was a newspaper, I have a hard time believing it would be notable, and even more so without a Russian language article. Timothy Joseph Wood  19:14, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep -- not a hoax. According to the source listed in the article (by Shirin Akiner, which is an RS), it was one of the three periodicals in the Lak language, and it existed longer than just in 1912-14, as it was reissued under the same name in the mid-century. Here's the link in Google books preview. Being one of only three newspapers in a given language (1948 - ?), I believe this meets WP:NNEWSPAPER #1. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:34, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying it is a hoax, only that it may be a hoax, notability is a separate matter. I could not find other sources other than what is already listed, which is why I thought that. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:42, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Ping prior voters to clarify that this article is not a hoax. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I tentatively stand by my !vote. This passing mention implies that other sources may exist, but it is not a substitute for those sources. Timothy Joseph Wood  00:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete: I could not find enough RS to prove the notability. -- M h hossein   talk 18:22, 29 January 2017 (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.