Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magahi people


 * 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 no consensus. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 11:56, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Magahi people

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There doesn't appear to be such an ethnic group. The scattered mentions of "Magahi people" to be found in the literature refer either plainly to speakers of Magahi, or more broadly to people who are from the region where Magahi is spoken. – Uanfala (talk) 22:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Pings to and to, who have been involved with the article. – Uanfala (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. – Uanfala (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. – Uanfala (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - one monograph and a passing mention in a book do not constitute significant coverage. Almost all of the text is completely unsourced. Bearian (talk) 22:16, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Rename Keep The article on language has a different scope, while this covers the culture and and social structure and other aspects of the Anthropology. The refs in the article are good., People of Magahi also threw some sources. Considering the regional language is Hindi, more sources can be found in Hindi. The topic IMHO is notable and I dont see it being redundant in any way. The deletion does not seem appropriate to me.  D Big X ray ᗙ  05:41, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think that the fact that a certain search phrase returns results on google automatically entails that there is an encyclopedic topic behind that phrase. The point of the nomination was that there's no Magahi people as an ethnic group. If the article is trimmed down of the trappings of ethnolinguistic reification and renamed to something like Culture of Magadh, then that's fine by me. – Uanfala (talk) 10:49, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , changed my !vote to rename. see my comment below.  D Big X ray ᗙ  18:41, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 05:10, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Do not delete, possibly merge and redirect. Agree with nominator. It appears there is no such ethnic group. This is a reference to people living on a certain territory. My very best wishes (talk) 02:24, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Alright, User:Uanfala your suggestion to rename this to Culture of Magadh, is also acceptable to me, that way this content can be WP:PRESERVED. This topic on culture is clearly notable.Accordingly I have changed my !vote. courtesy ping My very best wishes, and Bearian for their opinion on the rename. Closing admin should allow sufficient time for others to respond, before closing this thread.  D Big X ray ᗙ  16:53, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Do we have any good RS telling about the Magahi people or Culture of Magahi as a whole? If so, that would be a strong argument to keep. But if not, I would suggest merging the content to page Magadha (the corresponding territory). My very best wishes (talk) 21:17, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know the content matter to attempt answering the core questions, but I don't think Magadha, in its present state, is a good merge target as it's entirely about the ancient polity, while the article nominated here is about a contemporary cultural region. As for preserving the text, I'm not terribly keen on the idea because the bulk of it is unsourced. – Uanfala (talk) 16:36, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , FWIW I am half Magahi. There are already 9 sources as refs. I have checked the veracity of the unsourced content and they are not incorrect or imaginary. So it makes sense to preserve it, we should rename it as Culture. I agree that Magadha may not be a good merge target.  D Big X ray ᗙ  16:46, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * That's a revelation :) If you're ready to vouch for the veracity of the article's content, then of course I'm fine with that. At this stage, I think renaming appears like the best course of action. – Uanfala (talk) 21:22, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , :D. Yes, I can vouch for the veracity. And there are several books to expand the Magahi Culture article. .  D Big X ray ᗙ  05:43, 5 February 2020 (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.