Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Udch

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!} 07:24, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Udch

[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)

Created by a user who is now blocked for copyright violations, translation issues, and competence problems relating to poor English comprehension and writing.

At best, this is a slightly overwrought dictionary definition. At worst, it is sourced solely to a sketchy language-teaching website (see their "About us" page), with zero other sources located on a search. Either way, it should be deleted in the absence of reliable sourcing showing that offensive corridors created by the Ottomans are so notable compared to any other type of offensive corridor that they require their own article. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:18, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Turkey. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:18, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete When I search this up I get results related to some university in Chiclayo, which isn't a good first impression. I've searched both names on DergiPark, "Udch" gives no results at all while "Uch" gives a few unrelated things. I don't know where this is translated from, but there doesn't seem to be anything pointing to the existence of such thing. Likely a hoax. ~Styyx^Talk? 20:39, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unintelligible and unreferenced. Mztourist (talk) 09:19, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- I am surprised to find that the only reference on what is clearly a Turkish subject is a Russian one. I also find that article extremely imprecise as to what it is about. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:47, 11 September 2022 (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.