Deletion of Bhangalia

Comment: Sources are  websites and the /CASTE|historical disputes that caste articles attract means that we should demand high-quality reliable sources for such articles.  This sub-stub has little to no value and a redirect to Rajput would only be viable if we had substantive sources to declare that the identification was correct
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:SPS||WP:GS)

Comment: The references in the article are not  so they do not verify its notability. I looked at the material removed in April and did not find usable sources. Google produced one passing mention, and JSTOR and NYT did not produce sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: per Eggishorn and nom. I concur that available sourcing appears to be almost entirely from |self-published sources and not indicative of passing the |general notability guideline; the |significant coverage in |reliable sources as is required by the guideline simply do not appear to be met at this time
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:SPS||WP:GNG||WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS)