Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Megh bhagat


 * 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   redirect to Meghwal. The consensus was to merge and redirect, but since the merge has been done, I'm simply redirecting. The edit history remains intact should it be needed. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  13:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Megh bhagat

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There appear to be no credible sources for this article. I asked about this topic at the Noticeboard for India-related topics but the only response there indicated that they couldn't find sources either. Sophitessa (talk) 06:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  15:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Looks like "Megh" is an ethnic group, and "Bhagat" seems to be alternate name or a subgroup. utcursch | talk 16:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:42, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice. At present the article is a partially rephrased version of an article on this blog, and there's some other assertions on who belongs to the group etc that are completely unsourced; from the references section it appears that there are some books that may cover the topic, but it's not clear what's covered. The article would require a fundamental rewrite to be encyclopaedic and also not a copy vio. - SpacemanSpiff Calvin&#8225;Hobbes 17:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Meghwal since Aymatth2 has done a merge. - SpacemanSpiff Calvin&#8225;Hobbes 14:09, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep: but make into a stub. The subject may have encyclopedic value but the article itself needs a rewrite.  Making the article into a stub could encourage future valued edits.--TParis00ap (talk) 15:13, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect: per Aymatth2.--TParis00ap (talk) 14:14, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep but rename as Megh (people) and clean up. Meghwal should probably be merged into the same article - they seem to be the same people, or a subgroup. At present, it is poorly written and with poor references, but it certainly seems to be a real and significant subject. From Megh identified by User:Utcursch and other sources the Megh are a scheduled caste, Hindu, about 2.8 million people living in western India and eastern Sindh. I would give User:Bhagat.bb some time to improve it - he is new to Wikipedia and only started it a couple of weeks ago. I doubt that there is a copyvio - probably the same author (yes, probably SPA, but I don't see that as necessarily bad). If the decision is keep, I will help out. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * After doing some basic clean-up & research, I am inclined to agree with TParis00ap. A great deal of the content is neither neutral or verifiable - a mix of fantasy and polemic. But there is a core of real information on a notable subject. Aymatth2 (talk) 02:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Merge and redirect After digging around, it seems that Megh, Meghwar and Meghwal are essentially synonyms for the same people. There is no reason to have three poorly written and poorly sourced articles on one subject. This article and its title are derived from a speculative essay at that attempts to construct a history for the people. To TParis00ap's comment, Meghwal could use a lot of work. Leaving this title as a stub would just create a pointless fork. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:34, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a merge and redirect then? It seems that the articles have similar but different information.--TParis00ap (talk) 16:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of the information in this one is original research, but I have merged some content into Meghwal - not much, just verifiable content - so the merge is done. I am o.k. with a redirect decision. A Google search on "Megh bhagat" gives the blog and clones, the Wikipedia entry and clones, then various results like "SC Bride With Hindi Matrimony, Megh Bhagat, is Looking for a suitable Groom". I think Bhagat is a common Megh family name. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to do that.--TParis00ap (talk) 20:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Meghwal. I agree with Aymatth2 that Megh Bhagat is synonymous or subset of Meghval, but since content from this page has been (or needs to be) merged into the latter page, we cannot delete this article as per GFDL/CC-BY. Abecedare (talk) 06:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point. It is in fact possible to delete without violating copyright - occasionally there is a good reason. Basically the article is moved to a sub-page of the target article's talk page, taking it out of main space, and then a notice is put on the target article talk page and in the change log of the target article pointing to the moved article and saying content has been taken from it. That preserves the attribution history while allowing the title to be deleted. But there is no reason for such a convoluted approach here. A redirect works fine. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:41, 15 August 2009 (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.