Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conquest of Ajmer

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. Owen× ☎ 16:27, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conquest of Ajmer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Yet another MILHIST article that spun more around event's background and aftermath rather than describing the event itself. Fails WP:MILNG and WP:SIGCOV as sources measly refer this particular event as a capture of Ajmer alongwith Nagaur, could not find Seige Siege of Ajmer in the sources. Garuda ^Talk! 16:26, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I agree with your observations. The article has been in contention for deletion before too. Xoocit (talk) 22:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — (soft) — per nominator and above. That said, there do seem to be a number of sources listed in the “the battle” section… if someone could spin-out more information regarding the actual siege from these (or any other) I might be inclined to re-consider my position or at least rescind my “delete” position. But as-written, it’s a delete, for me. There is enough contention via multiple issues that I am rescinding my “delete” opinion (and altering it to Comment). MWFwiki (talk) 01:21, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Note that the initial contributor has a history of WP:CITEBOMB and just citing irrelevant and unreliable sources [1][2][3]; From the analysis of the sources, it is evident that they contain barely a few lines of passing mention, often limited to a single line:

  • [4]: This barely has one line of passing mention.
  • [5]: Page needed; however, upon searching through snippets, nothing relevant could be found.
  • [6]: Irrelevant to this conflict; nothing about the event was found. The initial contributor has a history of citing random sources without thoroughly reviewing them.
  • [7]: Same case here, a one liner"Mahmud Khalji of Malwa defeats Gajadhar".
  • [8]: Lastly, here as well, a line of passing mention. Garuda ^Talk! 16:44, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, India, and Rajasthan.
• Delete: Per nomination. - Ratnahastin (talk) 05:11, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The article was moved from Conquest of Ajmer to Seige of Ajmer at Special:Diff/1261104784, which I would have thought the nominator would have been aware of, so the argument that the sources refer to "capture of Ajmer" and not "Seige of Ajmer" and therefore it fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:MILNG on that basis is not a good argument. If anything they make an argument for moving the page back to the old name or similar. Pinging @Xoocit, @MWFwiki and Ratnahastin as you may not have been aware of the page move. TarnishedPath^talk 11:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Titles containing non-neutral terms like "Conquest" should be used with caution, as per MOS:MILNAME. Additionally, this event has only a few passing mentions and lacks sufficient independent, significant coverage to justify a standalone article. Garuda ^Talk! 16:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: This article seems to place more emphasis on the event's context and aftermath with very limited information about the actual 'Conquest of Ajmer', maintaining the title given instead, it describes the aftermath, particularly the construction of a mosque and a shrine, as well as the role of Khwaja Niamatullah and Makhdum Husain. I see only passing reference to the siege, without any citation, it does not provide the level of depth expected for WP:MILNG to pass.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 10:34, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Delete: I have moved this page from "Conquest of Ajmer" to "Siege of Ajmer" in the past on the basis of its lead title being misleading. A conquest is usually understood as the absorption of a territory into the state for a static amount of time, if not permanently. However, in this case it was recaptured by Kumbha within a few days. Aside from that, this article has multiple issues as noted by editors above, like WP:SIGCOV and WP:MILNG. Some cherry-picking of sources has also been done with the battle section, which was more of a siege, actually lacking a sufficient amount of source. Rawn3012 (talk) 11:40, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Per nom. Fails WP:SIGCOV RangersRus (talk) 01:00, 17 December 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.