Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajpasi (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Pasi (caste). (non-admin closure) Rollidan (talk) 03:53, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Rajpasi
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Created off of unreliable sources, does not seem to pass WP:GNG. Accidentally speedied under G6 and don't know if it is a significantly different enough page to fall under G4 rationale. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 20:25, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I was the one that declined the speedy, and it is significantly different than the deleted version. Primefac (talk) 20:27, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:28, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:28, 7 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep— See this 1869 publication. There are snippets in this 1989 work. All sources seem to link them to royalty/land owning. I would however recommend re-editing of this article.Tamsier (talk) 05:57, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The commentary in Raj-era censuses was written from the standpoint of "divide and rule" and "scientific racism", so the first of those sources should be treated very warily. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:12, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The sources you provided prove the existence of the article subject, but from my reading only seemed like passing mentions. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 15:53, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * They are not passing mentions thought! Even the second link which is a snippet of pages about the subject (especially the second) is not a passing mention. I do not see any issue with which Phil Bridger has identified. Even if that is true, that should be remedied by our neutrality and weight policies. That in itself is not grounds for deletion.Tamsier (talk) 23:22, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Please see User:Sitush/CasteSources, and the discussions linked from there, for a better explanation than I could give of why British Raj-era ethnographic sources are unreliable in this subject area. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:24, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:19, 15 July 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Chilling (talk) 14:33, 22 July 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑Scottywong | talk _ 01:55, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Pasi (caste). They're a subset of the Pasi, for whom we do have decent information and where said information notes the glorifying tendencies of the community. The available sources for a standalone article are passing mentions and unreliable etc. - Sitush (talk) 06:45, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Sitush. Primefac (talk) 18:52, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Chapter 7 of ISBN 9788132103455, by Badri Narayan, tells me that the redirect is the right answer. Uncle G (talk) 19:16, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep 190.146.124.155 (talk) 02:51, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Because...? Primefac (talk) 14:02, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: The anonymous user has made just five edits till date, out of which four are unexplained keep !votes, which they posted within a span of few seconds. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:52, 5 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Pasi (caste). It has received just passing mentions in reliable sources. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:52, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Nominator comment: I would also support a redirect to the page others have listed at this point. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 21:55, 5 August 2019 (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.