Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Arya (tribe)

user Chaipau earlier also filed deletion request two times, first time as content fork of Indo Aryan peoples, after discussion admin restored the article, next time as content fork of Rigvedic tribes, which too rejected. Kashmiri's claim that this article rejects Arya's central Asia origin is baseless, as it makes no such claims. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 20:26, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is much misrepresentation above. For the record, Arya (ancient Indian people) was deleted on WP:SPEEDY, and then restored when BB complained.  My WP:SPEEDY request for Arya (tribe) was removed by another editor, not an admin.  I have filed a merge request, not AfD.   The AfD for Arya (tribe) was filed by someone else, not me.  Chaipau (talk) 20:48, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I have only given example, consensus regarding articles utility already exists. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 21:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * For the record, I was one of the editors who contested speedy deletion, which I did purely on the basis that the article did not meet the strictly defined criteria for speedy deletion. That in no way indicates that I endorse this article or support keeping it after discussion here. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:04, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I did not make the claim you are alleging. The geographical origin of the Aryas is irrelevant here. The problem is not as much with the article content as with the fact that your very concept of "Arya (tribe)" is OR.  kashmiri TALK  21:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * If you think article content is fine, try removing delete template, and improve the article yourself. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 05:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Did I anywhere say the content was fine??? Man, read again and again that single-line paragraph above until you'll understand what it says.


 * In case you failed: It's not the content, it's the fact that the article's subject is a hoax.  kashmiri TALK  07:14, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Kashmiri you rather see the references in article, importantly citation two i.e Shendge, Malati Janardan (1996).The Aryas: Facts Without Fancy and Fiction. ISBN 8170173183. This book is completely on Arya people. And regarding reading your comment again, words says that problem is not as much with article content but my concept of Arya people. I like to know from you what is so called concept, if content is not as problematic, what is justification of deletion, how subject is hoax when a book is dedicated to it. As Bridger said after removing speedy deletion template, if it proved duplication, as claimed by Chaipau, it can be redirected not deleted. Why Iranians will use Sanskrit word as self designation.  भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 10:32, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Few books on Aryas


 * The Aryas: Facts Without Fancy and Fiction by Malati Janardan Shendge, 1996
 * The Sacred Laws Of The Aryas by F. Max Müller, 2001
 * Biographies of Words and the Home of the Aryas by F. Max Muller, 2004
 * The Sacred Laws of the Aryas Part II by F. Max Muller, 2004
 * The wisdom of the Aryas, 1923
 * The home of the Aryas: with notes, references and appendices by Lachhmi Dhar Kalla, University of Delhi, Prakāśana Vibhāga, 2002  भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak 11:28, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, I am really astonished that Max Müller published so many books in the 21st century - stupid me, I thought he was dead for 120 years... I suggest to continue the discussion where it started, i.e., at Talk:Aryan migration to Assam, where other editors have quoted plenty of recent research that does not uphold the 19th century "Aryan tribe" concept. As to other books, I don't have them in my home library, however considering the reliability of your references, I am not entirely convinced they actually support your concept.  kashmiri TALK  12:55, 24 July 2013 (UTC)