Anga (region): Mikeanand ( talk ) 06:37, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography , India , Bihar ,  and Jharkhand .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:36, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Well, this is disappointing.  I guess draftification will not be an option in this AFD.  L iz Read!  Talk!  01:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I think Anga(region) page should be accepted as a seperate region from Mithila as it is, from ancient till modern times.  The the deletion nominations are from  a particular based political associations which are from Wikipedia Mithila 2409:408A:158F:D384:DD37:55FE:C4DB:CC06 ( talk ) 04:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It should not be deleted, In this Afd debate I request you not to delete the pg.  Agama Triptika source 6 has also mentioned it as a seperate region.  And the Hindi newschannels are also from the same country and a national-level newspaper such as Dainik Jagaran and Hindustan has also published Anga or Ang Pradesh as a seperate region.if you dont know hindi you can translate and see.  2409:408A:158F:D384:DD37:55FE:C4DB:CC06 ( talk ) 04:49, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - Could the nom please expand on the deletion rationale.  The last AfD is a mess, and the immediate move out of draft space is.. .  brave.  But what are the policy reasons for deletion?  Pinging Mikeanand Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 08:14, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Sirfurboy : , Good morning.  Most of the sources in the article point either to the language Angika or the historical region Anga , both of which are notable.  However, the sources used for the "modern Anga region" fail WP:RS .  There isn't much in Google/Books either, most of which have been used for wp:or .  I believe the article needs to removed from mainspace for failing WP:GNG .  Mikeanand ( talk ) 08:28, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It can't be draftified again so the question is going to be whether it meets WP:GEOLAND .  If it does, it is presumed notable.  If not then it will have to be a delete (with consideration of salt owing to the way it was rushed out of draft space).  I have some reading to do here before I can express an opinion, but to confirm then: (1), it is not a legally recognised name for the region?  (2) are there reliable secondary sources that refer to the region by this name now, even without legal recognition?  and (3) I see the Angika language was spoken in Bihar.  Was the territory of the language formerly known as Anga?  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 10:21, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Sirfurboy : Well, to put it straight forward, it fails WP:GEOLAND .  It is not a legally recognised name for the region.  There was a territory called "Anga" in the history, which already has a separate article, Anga .  Angika is named after the historical territory of Anga , however, there are no reliable sources to establish the notability of a modern day Anga (region) .  Thank you. — Mikeanand ( talk ) 11:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Sirfurboy the different books such as Agama Triptika have recognised it as a seperate region referring to Anga Lipi 's region.  Biharpro7252 ( talk ) 12:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Sirfurboy Well It passes WP:GEOLAND The answer is neither yes nor no.  Yes It is recognised as a seperate region in Modern times.the sources are ABP News which is a national media channel which still shows it as a seperate modern region of Bihar during any coverage on BIhar.  Its a common thing in Bhagalpur , Munger and parts of purnea division territory of Anga as popular national hindi newspapers such as Dainik Jagran,Hindustan , Prabhat Khabar have always published it as Anga region hindi ang kshetra.Shreyasi Singh a national level  shooter Commonwealth games champion has said in an interview Anga as her region referring to guiness book of world record And the National party BJP in the region have always termed it as a seperate region.The local MLAs and MPs have also recognised the region as Anga.  Yes ,the answer is references are there .  Outlook.com an Indian weekly magazine and all the competitive books have recognised it as a language of anga region.  sources are there in languages . I will try to upload more.  Biharpro7252 ( talk ) 12:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Well that is clear as mud :) So to question 1, the answer cannot be neither yes nor no.  It is one or the other.  It is a legally recognised region or it is not.  From my reading thus far, I am coming down on the "not" side there.  Question 2 has contradictory statements, but what matters is the sources.  On the page there are a few useful sources, and one of these is [16] which has: Angika is the local dialect and is spoken by the majority.  It is an Indo-Iranian language of the Anga region of India, an approximately 58,000 km2 area that falls within the contemporary states of Bihar, Jharkhand, and West Bengal.  (page 272).  The book is published by Springer, and has good editors but is not on the subject of geography.  It is about education practice.  But it is a WP:RS I believe.  References in [17] on pages 95-98 appear to be primarily historical.  The answer to question 3 is, by general agreement and per that second source, yes there was a historical region called Anga which encompassed the extent of the Angika language.  Yes we have an Angika article, but that is about the language, and not the territory.  But then we run into a problem, because the linguistic extents of different languages overlap.  So an informally defined area as the extent of the Angika language is not a clearly defined region.  In any case this article purports to be about a modern Anga region or Ang Pradesh.  I am not convinced the article is well targeted.  We have some evidence that the area of extent of the Angika language is still known as Anga.  That makes sense, but it is not a legally defined name.  Indeed, the area is within other specific regions.  I have not been able to find enough on this to make this a clear keep, so at this stage, I am thinking it should be a merge to Angika which article has a territory section, in which we can say that the territory in which Angika is spoken is known as Anga or Ang Pradesh.  If I find more sources, or more are presented, I would be willing to reconsider this.  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 20:52, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge Delete per Mikeanand and Fylindfotberserk in the previous AfD (linked in the nomination).  /I am myself unsure about what could be merged, if anything, but I believe those editors who say that there is some content good for merging/ I'd particualrly like to point out that I can't verify that this is, as it is claimed, a geographical region as in a region that is bounded by natural features.  About "historical region", I couldn't find any confirmation that a modern "Anga region" or "Ang Pradesh" or "Anga Pradesh" contain, as is claimed, includes the territory of the Santhal Pargana division , for example.  According to our article, in 2011, ~10 percent of the people in that division spoke Angika.  Yet the article seems to argue that the Anga region is the "territory" where Angika is spoken.  We could construct a modern "geographic and historical region" like this for any ancient or medieval Indian state, and we'd have layers upon layers of such "regions" that overlap, intersect etc.  See: Category:Historical Indian regions .  Each has its own legacy and some residual, notional, presence in the modern day, but we should not make modern mirror images of these articles.  — Alalch E. 20:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as per Sirfurboy .  From what I understand, Anga is not a legally distinct area.  It's just where Angika speakers live.  However, language and culture go hand in hand so this is a point of contention.  As mentioned in Angika#Relationship_to_Maithili , there is tension between speakers of Maithili (majority language) and Angika (minority language).  Maithili speakers have made calls for a separate state (Mithila).  Judging by how this usually goes, there is probably some level of irredentism in saying Anga exists as a region of its own for Angika speakers.  On the other hand, there may be a case of Angika erasure.  Either way, I feel these claims would make great additions to Angika and Anga (if properly sourced).  Looking through some talk page history, it seems the article author (Biharpro7252) believes they are targeted by editors who are "all are from a specific political group and always target a specific language and page".  Specifically, I think they are referring to Mikeanand who is on WikiProject Mithila.  It seems this feud between Angika and Maithili speakers goes a bit deeper.  Recently there were a few vandalistic AfD requests by user Proverealbiharhistory who also seems to promote Angika and dislike Maithili culture (they requested to delete Maithili_language and Mithila_(region) ) -- Klausklass ( talk ) 05:38, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ya you are right.  Mithila too is associated with Maithili.same ways Anga is associated with Angika.  There is always some tensions between the both.  I too support Anga as my cultural region.  2409:408A:2C44:1B7A:0:0:AA8A:FC0A ( talk ) 16:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't dislike mathili .  Mathili and angika is sister language ( same origin) but both are different.official angika is classified as a direct of Hindi and one of addition official language of jharkhand .  Few years ago Some maithili start claiming angika as a direct so that came make mathili state .  If  we can't create anga region  Wikipedia page soon anga history , anga culture , Angika language  will Died .  You become one of kill of a historical language.  —Proverealbiharhistory ( talk ) 19:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I too can totally understand you.  Biharpro7252 ( talk ) 12:09, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:52, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment so an editor with a somewhat partisan name, Proverealbiharhistory, urges us to either keep this article as a piece of advocacy for Anga causes or somehow  share responsibility for cultural oblivion?  I think that’s the most ludicrous AfD rationale I’ve ever read.  Mccapra ( talk ) 09:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Sirfurboy's analysis and suggestion, unless further sources are found.  We might also consider updating the hatnote on Anga — siro χ o 09:48, 27 August 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: merge