Cilician campaign of Kaykaus I: The one source I can access, the Encyclopedia of Islam, does not support what is written in the text at all, failing WP:V .  ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk ) 12:22, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Military ,  and Turkey .  ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk ) 12:22, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 17:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Did you check Claude Cahen ?  His works would be the first I'd check and I would not be surprised if there is enough for an article.  Srnec ( talk ) 14:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete .  Here is a mention of "regular campaigns" by Kaykaus in Cilicia but nothing in-depth.  Sourcing in this article appears to constitute a big problem, since much of the references are to historical sources such as Ibn Bibi , and some of the citations are insufficient.  For example, I couldn't find the work titled Turkiye by Osman Turan.  The closest is a book titled Selçuklular Zamanında Türkiye ( transl. Turkey under the Seljuks ), which might be it and may really include relevant content.  Both Turan and Öngül (another source used in this article) were cited by RS and appear to be specialized in this particular period of history.  I believe this article needs thorough editing by removing OR, rewording it to be neutral, checking whether each source verifies the content, so I wouldn't object a keep if much of these issues are solved or there is an apparent attempt to do so.  I believe such articles or content would be valuable, but this article has a lot of issues.  It could also be draftified, but a lot of time has passed, and the creator doesn't appear to be active.  Aintabli ( talk ) 17:51, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : The article has a number of offline references; I default to trusting them for now.  See the WP:SOURCEACCESS section of WP:V which is further explained in the Offline sources essay.  Note that this article was proposed for deletion and @ User:Phil Bridger removed the tag.  I'm pinging him.  The sources are likely to be hard to find and translate in the brief period an AfD is open.  I support User:AirshipJungleman29 questioning them; he's been contending with multiple articles by @ Soldier of Seljuk 1071 .  At the same time, I don't support deletion.  Soldier of Seljuk 1071, has not been active on en.wikipedia since March although they edited the Turkish Wikipedia 2 weeks ago.  They have created several other articles on en.wikipedia with similar offline sourcing: Battle of Keban (1218) Seljuk civil war of 1211–1213 I removed the PROD tag several hours ago Cilician campaign of Kayqubad I Surrender of Alara Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surrender of Alara The following were deleted as a group at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Anamur : Siege of Manavgat Siege of Anamur Siege of Aydos Taşeli's Invasion Battle of Taurus Siege of Germianapolis Siege of Aydusanc Invasion of Silifke (1225) Siege of Mut (1225) They also have some draft articles: Draft:Siege of Kayseri (1211–1212) Draft:Siegees of Çinçin and Hançin Draft:Siege of Ankara (1212-1213) Draft:Nigde Revolt (1212) Draft:Battle of Melhama (1218) Draft:Siege of Mut Soldier of Seljuk discussed some of their sourcing at Talk:Cilician campaign of Kaykaus I A translation of their Turkish talk page, tr:Kullanıcı mesaj:Soldier of Seljuk 1071 ( translation ) shows they've had some history articles deleted there: tr:I.  Alâeddin Keykubad'ın Kilikya Seferi deleted for being a stub tr:Maraş Kuşatması (1149) - PROD ( tr:VP:SÖ ), no explanation tr:Güneydoğu Anadolu Seferi (1149-1151) - PROD, no explanation tr:Keysun Kuşatması - PROD, no explanation tr:Keban Muharebesi PROD for Manual of Style violations CSD ( tr:VP:HS ) - reason unclear A Turkish editor questioned the notability and Soldier of Seljuk replied.  translation tr:1216-1218 Kilikya Seferi - CSD for little or no content Zafer and Vikipolimer were the tr.wikipedia admins that deleted most of these and they both edit here.  I would be interested to get their assessment of this and similar articles although I'm concerned that might be canvassing -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 17:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 17:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] In the absence of any further comments and feedback in the last 6 days, I'm pinging @ Zafer and @ Aintabli -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 18:42, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I can't comment further on the article itself.  There appears to be a flood of related articles, and I'm concerned of possible sock or meatpuppetry.  I lean towards deletion.  Aintabli ( talk ) 18:56, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi @ A. B. , my english isn't perfect, but yes I think that the articles opened by this user with unverifiable sources are fake historiography.  Regards, Zafer ( talk ) 19:40, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I am pretty sure there was a deletion discussion last year about an earlier incarnation of this article, but there is such a flood of Turkish battlebollox  on this site it’s hard to be sure it wasn’t something different but equally dubious.  Given the tendency of highly inventive article creators to exclusively cite offline sources I don’t think we can take anything here as being fit to put out to our readers.  No objection to draftification.  Mccapra ( talk ) 20:34, 31 July 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete