Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ram Pyari Gurjar (The Lady Chieftain)


 * 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. The option to merge was rather firmly rejected. Primefac (talk) 18:06, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Ram Pyari Gurjar (The Lady Chieftain)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a myth popularized by sources affiliated to the Gurjar community, and a non-notable one, as evidence from lack of coverage in reliable sources. No reliable history book that mentions this person. A Wikipedia article once existed on this person, but was PROD-ded as hoax (see Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics/Archive 60). The sources cited in the current article are Wikipedia mirrors and/or unreliable:


 * Betascript Publishing book: Wikipedia mirror, as noted at OmniScriptum
 * Ram Pyari Gurjar by Ronald Cohn, Jesse Russell: Another Wikipedia mirror - see Mirrors and forks/Vwxyz
 * Timur invaded India by Jesse Russell, Ronald Cohn - same as above
 * World Heritage Encyclopedia - Mirrors and forks/Vwxyz
 * The Popular Indian - non-notable blog, not even close to WP:RS. The note at the end of the blog post counts Wikipedia as one of the sources for the article ("विकिपीडिया से जुटाई गयी सामग्री पर आधारित है").

utcursch &#124; talk 16:44, 7 August 2018 (UTC) utcursch &#124; talk 16:44, 7 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete and mark as hoax. Looks like this has been going on since 2015! Adding this to List of hoaxes on Wikipedia may also be helpful. Gilded Snail (talk) 23:26, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. GameInfirmary Talk 19:58, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. GameInfirmary Talk 19:58, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GameInfirmary Talk 19:58, 7 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete-Nothing in reliable source(s).There's a hit at this book but am uncertain about the reliability of the publishing house or the credentials of the author. &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 10:42, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Nau Nihal Singh's The Royal Gurjars is aimed at glorification of the Gurjar / Gujjar community, and is not WP:HISTRS / WP:RS-compliant. For example, it claims that Porus was a Gurjar king who defeated Alexander. Quote from pages 331-332: "Greek King Alexander defeated Iran and set the Iranian capital Porsipolice on five. Thereafter in 326 BC he invaded Indian borders. In the battle with Indian army he was wounded by an arrow and he had to take shelter of Nand Mahar. He was so much impressed by his hospitality that he went back from there. However, this invasion by Alexander opened the door for foreign invasion on India. Porus Maloe who fought bravely wiih Alexander and defeated him and Nand Mahar who offered hospitality to him when he was wounded were both Gurjars." utcursch &#124; talk 20:48, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * That speaks volumes:-) &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 04:21, 9 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment -- I have tidied this up. If any of it is verifiable, it might be worth keeping, but we cannot have material sourced only from WP mirrors.  If kept it should be at Ram Pyari Gurjar.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:46, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Merge and Redirect with Gurjar Comment Since the nom says "It is a popular Myth" so why cant the article be kept as such ? Apart from what has already been presented it is hard to find sources in English. More sources might be in hindi, That supports this myth theory. I was able to find a newspaper article and the hindi Wikipage रामप्यारी_चौहान_गुर्जर (Which I linked) also has some hindi sources as references. Based on these sources I am inclined to keep it and also create a redirect Rampyari Gurjar -- D Big X ray  14:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The topic lacks significant coverage in reliable sources: it fails WP:GNG. The only semi-decent website that covers this topic is Patrika.com, but its articles are not reliable per WP:CONTEXTMATTERS, because they present this topic as authentic history rather than as a myth / hoax.
 * This Patrika article by Rajkumar Pal cites "many writers who wrote on Jat history" as its source: It claims that the army of the "Jat Sarvkhap Mahapanchayat" defeated Timur's 90,000-strong cavalry, and Timur died from the wounds sustained in this war.
 * This Parika slide show by Yuvraj Singh cites Swami Omanand Saraswati as it source. Singh doesn't mention a specific article / book, but that doesn't matter anyway, because Omanand was not a qualified historian: he was a Jat Arya Samaj leader (see below). The slide show claims that Jograj was a 7 feet 9 inch tall Gurjar warrior, who weighed 320 kg. His army supposedly included 40,000 women from Gurjar, Jat, Ahir, Rajput, Harijan, Valmiki, Tyagi and other castes. The courage of Ram Pyari, the 20-year old commander of this female contingent is said to have frightened Timur, whose army was ultimately forced to flee the battlefield.
 * These articles talk of a 14th century army that included 40,000 women, and that forced Timur to flee India. If this topic were notable, it would have found a mention in more reliable sources, even if it were legendary in nature.
 * The Hindi Wikipedia articles "महाबली जोगराज सिंह गुर्जर" and "रामप्यारी चौहान गुर्जरी" are themselves poorly-sourced (and tagged as such).
 * mihirbhojnayidishagroup.blogspot.com - not a reliable source
 * veergurjarmahasabha.com - Gurjar caste association website, not a reliable source
 * snipview.com - inlcudes snippets of Wikipedia articles, not reliable per WP:CIRCULAR
 * cyclopaedia.info - another Wikipedia mirror
 * is a dead link, and not reliable anyway
 * is Jatland, a wiki whose editors left Wikipedia after their edits were undone here, and the sources they were citing were deemed unreliable here (see example below)
 * History of Origin of Some Clans in India by Mangal Sen Jindal - a pseudo-history book, which claims that Jutland is the homeland of Jats, the word "Germany" derives from Sanskrit "ग्रामनी" etc. Of course, you can read it on Jatland.
 * Rise of the Jat power by Rajpal Singh: Doesn't seem to mention any Jograj or Ram Pyari. The book is chiefly about the Bharatpur State. It briefly describes Timur's invasion on page 10, and does not mention that any Indian army defeated him.
 * Conquest of Tamerlane by Cothburn O'Neal: Another fake ref. The book doesn't mention Jograj or Ram Pyari.
 * Articles of Swami Omanand: No specific articles are mentioned, but as mentioned above, Omanand's writings are not reliable sources. Here are some claims from his books:
 * Because of political reasons such as persecution by Vishnu, the Sumali-led Rakshasas of Lanka migrated to patala which is same as the Americas. These Rakshasa spread the Vedic culture in the Americas, and the Native Americans are their descendants. Quetzalcoatl is related to the Sanskrit word "सालकटंकट ".
 * The humans originated in Tibet, which was a part of India, but the cunning British separated it from India... Indian wrestlers are inferior to the Iranian wrestlers, because they drink buffalo milk instead of cow milk
 * : In the ancient times, Haryana was a matchless heaven-like country full of prosperity and devoid of violence. In 1857, the people of Haryana were the first ones to rebel against the British. As a punishment, the British looters divided the united Haryana into various parts, which were merged with UP, Punjab, Rajasthan, and Delhi.
 * I kid you not - Omanand presents all this as authentic history, not mythology or legends. I'm unable to find his book which supposedly mentions Jograj and Ram Pyari, but I'm pretty sure that it is on par with the the above in terms of reliability.
 * When reliable sources start covering Jograj and Ram Pyari, we can have an article on them, presenting them as legendary characters. utcursch &#124; talk 19:59, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge with Gurjar. Hi utcursch, thanks for the detailed reply, I really appreciate your efforts here. Lets not get into WP:ANALYSIS of sources. The subject is a valid search term and has decent coverage. I do agree that it may not be notable on itself but valid WP:ATD exists here, in the form of caste article Gurjar where this can be merged. -- D Big X ray  22:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Unbolding duplicate suggestion per RfC format, in order to avoid confusion. -The Gnome (talk) 13:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * And why, pray tell, should we not discuss and analyze sources? Why, when Wikipedia is based on sources more than anything else? I believe we should rather stick with sources, if you don't mind. User  utcursch did excellent work here. It cannot be ignored. -The Gnome (talk) 13:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * My point is that nominator's comment above is delving into a critique of the books. which is beyond the scope of us as wiki editors. If you have sources of actual Critiques of the books/articles that say that this book is using myth as a history or something that you are claiming above, I might agree. At this point I am not going to argue if she was from History or Mythology, that is for the historians to decide upon (and not this AfD). Our discussion on this AfD is on the notability of the subject.  My only point here on this AfD is that the subject is notable "enough for a redirect" due to the coverage and hence deserves a WP:REDIRECT per WP:R-- D Big X ray   15:37, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Need consensus on whether to delete or redirect / merge
 * Delete - Per reasoning above by nominator --Adamstraw99 (talk) 20:13, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Requesting a Relist since there is now a valid WP:ATD to merge to Gurjar that I suggested today on the last day of the AfD . -- D Big X ray  22:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  11:03, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination and per utcursch's forensic work above. There is next to nothing that can be used to Merge, actually. If there was something of substance here, it'd have been kept as an independent article. So, no case for WP:ATD can be made. -The Gnome (talk) 13:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment The notability threshold for an individual article vs merge are not the same. Rampyari Gurjar have enough coverage to merit a merge to Gurjar Some more Book sources about the subject by different authors here.  -- D Big X ray   13:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Below a threshold of notability that's determined by consensus, when notability is in doubt, the subject generally does not deserve a stand-alone article about it. Above that threshold, is generally does. If it can't reach the threshold but is related to another article's subject, it can generally be merged into it. This is from policy. WP:MERGEREASON states that pages (articles) are merged if a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, at which point it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic. We also learn that merge is advisable if a short article requires the background material or context from a broader article in order for readers to understand it. Notability is paramount at all times.
 * The contested text possesses no attributes useful for a merge. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 14:43, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The subject has enough coverage (as linked above) to merit a mention in the article on her Clan. Merge and Redirect per WP:R is a valid WP:ATD here. -- D Big X ray   15:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)


 * "Enough coverage" is not sufficient: "Enough coverage in reliable sources" is required. Both "गुर्जर वीर-वीरांगनाएं" (Gurjara vīra-vīrāṅganāeṃ) and "गुर्जर काल-चक्र" (Gurjara kāla cakra) are caste glorifying books that are not reliable by Wikipedia's standards. Here are some quotes from Gurjara kāla cakra:
 * "यह तो सच है की गुर्जरों का महान राज्य दो बी.सी. से लेकर बारहवीं सदी संसार के अधिक तर भागों पर रहा है" (p. 18): "It's true that the great rule of the Gurjars existed on most parts of the world between 2 BC to the 12th century")
 * "उस समय गुर्जरों के राज्य दक्षिण भारत तक फैल चुके थे... बाद में चोला गुर्जर सल्तनत स्थापित हो गयी" (p. 58), "चौला (गुर्जर) राजा-राजा [sic] दक्षिण में राज करते थे" (p. 35): "By that time, the Gurjar kingdoms had spread to South India... subsequently, Chola Gurjar Sultanate was established", "Chola (Gurjar) king Rajaraja ruled in the South"
 * Gurjara kāla cakra (p. 56): "सच्चाई तो यह है कि विक्रमादित्य भी तोरमण मिहिरकुल की तरह एक गुर्जर महाराजा था।". Translation: "The truth is that Vikramaditya, like Toramana Mihirakula, was a Gurjar king"
 * A cursory look at Gurjara vīra-vīrāṅganāeṃ suggests that it falls in the same category. For example, p. 14 describes Kanishka as a Raghuvanshi descended from Kusha, and p. 39 claims that Bhoja was a Gurjar.
 * Suppose, we ignore all above arguments, and decide to merge this article to Gurjar. What do you propose to write in the article "Gurjar"?
 * "Ram Pyari Gurjar is a mythical Gurjar warrior": This statement is not supported by any source, because no scholarly / academic book has covered this topic (unlike, say, Agrasen, whom Agrawal authors often describe as a historical person, but who is also covered in the reliable sources that clearly call him a legendary / mythical king.)
 * "Ram Pyari Gurjar was a historical warrior who fought against Timur": this is not supported by any reliable source. The books that do mention Ram Pyari Gurjar also claim that Porus was a Gurjar king who defeated Alexander or that everyone from Vikramaditya to Rajaraja Chola were Gurjars -- they are not reliable sources.
 * The problem is not that Ram Pyari Gurjar has not been covered by any sources: the problem is that she has not been covered by reliable sources. utcursch &#124; talk 17:20, 15 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete nothing presents this person as an authentic historical person. The article is written in factual tone, and verifiability matters. This article is not verified by reliable sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:25, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Now Delete -- It is clear from utcursch's research that the article concerns a person, who either did not exist, or is a literary invention; and certainly NN. I cannot support a redirect (1) because the target does not mention this person and (2) because it is too easy for it to be reinstated as a substantive article.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:18, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment I have changed my ! vote above in favour of the consensus. The Article author (now banned) is another problem that led to this decision. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  17:34, 19 August 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.