Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ndaba kaMageba


 * 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   keep. WP:SNOW yandman  13:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Ndaba kaMageba

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

no sources; nothing on google books; non-notable. —Chris Capoccia T&#8260;C 14:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC) Keep This article has been heavily revised, and now it looks like there are plenty of good sources for a Zulu king named Ndaba. So the article should definitely be kept. There aren't any reliable sources about "kaMageba", so probably the article should be moved to Ndaba, but that's for another discussion. —Chris Capoccia T&#8260;C 12:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * If you search for ndaba+great-grandfather, you'll find a number of books and articles that mention a Zulu king or chief Ndaba who was the great grandfather of Shaka. Maybe some of these sources can be used to write a real article. --Hegvald (talk) 17:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * But what about "kaMageba"? Was he the king? Or was it some other Ndaba? —Chris Capoccia  T&#8260;C 10:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I have no idea. It just struck me that searching for part of the name may get better results, which it did. The genealogy appears to match, and the person appears to be "notable" by any reasonable definition, even if the biographical details known for certain may be few and vague. But to write something that is useful to anyone looking for the topic, one would probably need to do a more thorough bibliographical search and look for printed sources not available on the web. (Would it matter if the article in its current state were to be deleted? Of course not, not unless it creates some kind of precedent against a new article. It may even improve the chances of getting a better article, as it would offer someone the pleasure of starting from scratch rather than from some silly little pseudo-article that someone else abandoned a long time ago.) --Hegvald (talk) 11:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just an additional comment to point out that the "current state" of the article has changed, as User:Ikip has started working on an article on Ndaba. At this point, it would clearly no longer be appropriate to delete the page. --Hegvald (talk) 10:31, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep based on sources found by Hegvald. King of the Zulus is a notable position. Edward321 (talk) 00:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —  Aitias   // discussion 00:01, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete What is there to keep? Nothing is verifiable and there's really nothing there to keep is there? ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unless it can be expanded. Queenie   Talk  19:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, Expand Then expand it. If I nominated every stub I saw for deletion, Wikipedia would have thousands less articles, and those articles would have to be start from scratch again.--Unionhawk (talk) 22:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing of value will be lost. Letsdrinktea (talk) 23:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep A ruler of the Zulus should automatically be notable. Improve, don't delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riffic (talk • contribs)
 * Strong Keep and expand. In the A Zulu-English Dictionary By Alfred T. Bryant which is 1905 downloadable book from google, pg 38 says that Ndaba succeeded Punga, and from "Ndaba downwards the geneology is certain".  I have since added 8 more scholarly references. Ikip (talk) 18:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin the article has been expanded extensively since the AfD, with sources which prove Ndaba was a Zulu king. Ikip (talk) 18:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note, this AfD has been listed on: WikiProject Africa, Zulu, List of Zulu kings Ikip (talk) 19:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: once it was established this was a ruler on the Zulu kingslist, this AFD should have been closed. Deletion is to remove topics which should never have a Wikipedia article devoted to them.  Editing and research is for improving them.  I'm continually shocked that people don't recognise the difference.  T L Miles (talk) 21:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and build. EagleFan (talk) 01:04, 23 February 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.