Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harpal Dev Makwana

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. ✗plicit 14:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harpal Dev Makwana

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is part of a WP:WALLEDGARDEN on the Jhala dynasty and Jhala (clan) created by a now-blocked sockmaster. The core sources for these articles are books of purported genealogy published by Jhala family descendants. This article takes someone who is almost certainly a legendary figure and launders the sources to present him as a historical person. He may have been, but the sources do not indicate that:

Genealogy, Archive, Image: Interpreting Dynastic History in Western India is edited by two Jhala family members, including one who presents himself as heir and descendent of Harpal Dev. It includes fantastic stories from the vahi (legendary geneaologies of high-caste Indian families), including Harpal Dev/Harpaldev defeating a ghost in battle and marrying a goddess, Shak-Ti who supernaturally rescues their children from an elephant.
Rajput is a self-published book that repeats and embellishes the same rather fantastic legends.
A Life with Wildlife: From Princely India to the Present is also by a purported descendant of Harpal Dev and retails the same fantastic stories, but at least presents them as legend.
Harpal Dev appears in WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS in several government gazetteers, including some cited in this article]
Popular Culture in a Globalised India is cited for a factual biographical claim, but it only discusses Harpal Dev in the context of a fictional stage play.
The Rajputs of Saurashtra discusses the Jhala Rajputs but says of the Harpal Dev story, "Bardic tales about their migrations from the Himalayan region to Sindh seem to contain little truth."
The article's sources include a few other trivial mentions, including a Who's Who that retails a descendant's claim of descent from Harpal Dev

Bottom line: What WP:SIGCOV we have on Harpal Dev is legend repeated by WP:SPS and WP:COI sources. The independent coverage, such as it is, does not establish him as a historical figure. I know WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP, but with such a compromised article I recommend WP:TNT instead of trying to battle an army of socks claiming legendary stories are real. Fails WP:V and WP:GNG for lack of SIGCOV in independent, reliable, secondary sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and India. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Reviewed all sources and I agree with the nominator's analysis of the page snd sources. Some sources just briefly mention about Legends and tales of the subject and some other sources I do find unreliable WP:RAJ. There is no WP:SIGCOV on the subject and the role in history to be considered notable and to warrant a page on Wikipedia. RangersRus (talk) 15:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete excellent reasoning in nomination, nothing further to add. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.