Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Semerkand


 * 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. Salvio giuliano 09:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Siege of Semerkand

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Another one of many battle articles which fails WP:VER, WP:NOTABLE and seemingly WP:RS as well. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:27, 29 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 02:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military.  Just ' i ' yaya  05:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uzbekistan-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete -- The fact that the battle box records a mere 18 casualties suggests that this was not a serious siege. The article on  Samarkand deals  with this in one sentence referring to a rebellion.  If it is kept it should be as Siege of Samarkand (1365), using the normal English spelling for this important city.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep? per . At a glance, the article seems wrong, but I want to read this paper before deciding. If kept, it would need a new title. The events in Samarkand in 1365–1366 do seem able to sustain an article. Srnec (talk) 21:54, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: A potential WP:ATD could be a redirect/merge to one of the many articles covering Tamerlane, like Timur, Timurid Empire, Timurid conquests and invasions, or Samarkand. Curbon7 (talk) 13:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Relist. If you are advocating a Redirect/Merge, now is the time to settle on a target article. Thanks. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: several paragraphs about this here I think, fwiw.Elinruby (talk) 10:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete. The source that Elinruby highlights is written in impenetrably bad English and in any case doesn’t substantiate any of the specific factual claims in the article we’re considering. The source found by Srnec is very good, but likewise doesn’t seem to support anything specific in the article. The article we have isn’t really consistent with anything else we can find. If someone wants to write a properly written and properly sourced article on this topic that would be great, but until then our readers are not well served by our publishing this kind of unreliable information. Mccapra (talk) 09:16, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. My searches (Google, Google Books, Wikipedia Library) brought up nothing useful, the existing citing doesn't have enough to suggest significant coverage. CT55555 (talk) 14:33, 17 February 2023 (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.