Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Samarkhel

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:20, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Samarkhel (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)

Quite the same rationale as of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First Siege of Samarkhel: The article is possibly a WP:HOAX, with no sign of independent significant coverage and only passing mentions: The Mujahideen managed to seize Samarkhel village east of Jalalabad in the sources. Also it look likes it's a WP:SAMETYPEFORK. – Garuda ^Talk! 23:02, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Terrorism, Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, and United States of America. – Garuda ^Talk! 23:02, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The Siege of Samarkhel is the original article before someone made the “First Siege of Samarkhel” article. They deleted the entire article to make it but I luckily reverted it. AfghanParatrooper19891 (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two sources that mention the fighting in Samarkhel:

https://www.rebellionresearch.com/what-happened-in-the-battle-of-jalalabad

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/09/13/world/jalalabad-shows-its-recovery-as-siege-by-rebels-dwindles.html

However, this “siege” was part of the Battle of Jalalabad but I did not make this article. I don’t know whose idea was it to call it a “siege”. AfghanParatrooper19891 (talk) 14:47, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: There doesn't seem to be much evidence for the seige, one of the sources only mentions that Samarkhel was seized . Even if a seige did take place, it isn't notable enough for a standalone article. AlvaKedak (talk) 13:52, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. Timtim76 (talk) 15:50, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Not notable. Per nomination. Rubik's Cube 3x3 20:05, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. This would seem like a slam-dunk deletion but two editors who argued for Deletion are very inexperienced which makes me wonder how they turned up at this AFD. This situation causes me to relist this discussion to get more feedback from our experienced AFD regulars.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Going through the 14 sources currently on the article as I write this.

- [1] Appears to be LLM/AI generated based on the website, lack of sources, and lack of author. It also fails to mention a seige of Samarkhil (note the spelling difference) but does mention that the village was part of the defenses of Jalalabad (if we can trust what it says).

- [2] A reliable source about the Battle/Siege of Jalalabad that does mention Samarkhel in passing but it doesn't appear that there was any significant siege of that location.

- [3] Another reliable source talking about the siege of Jalalabad, no mention of Samarkhel.

- [4] Page 45 as the citation claims is about the year 1000 CE, so it is only 980 or so years off. The book does mention Jalalabad (unsure of full context though) with only a brief mention of Samarkhel.

- [5] Another solid looking book that mentions Samarkhel as a location but nothing about a siege.

- [6] same source as number [2]

- [7] no mention of Samarkhil or Samarkhel, only 2 results for Jalalabad.

- [8] This mentions Samarkhel as a frontline, but in the battle of Jalalabad, not its own siege.

- [9] Same source as [4], this time the page marked is the singular mention of Samakhel, but again it appears to be a brief mention, not its own topic.

- [10] mentions Samarkhel (Mountain) purely in relation to being near Jalalabad.

- [11] Unfortunately Google books doesn't have Search Inside for this one so No Comment.

- [12] Same as [1], just as bad now as it was then.

- [13] Someone with military history training might tell me if this is important? but as far as I can tell it just talks about Jalalabad.

- [14] Same as [8]

Overall I think this article was mistakenly created from the Siege/Battle of Jalalabad article and should be deleted. It doesn't appear as if there was any actual siege that occurred for this to even be worthy of a redirect to the main page instead. Moritoriko (talk) 02:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: The sources provided only mention Samarkhel in passing as part of the Battle of Jalalabad, not as a separate siege, violating WP:NOR and WP:SYNTH, the article appears to be a WP:SAMETYPEFORK of the broader battle. NXcrypto Message 20:28, 1 March 2025 (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.