Siege of Barwara (1757) : Based.Kashmiri (🗨️) 09:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Military ,  and India .  Shellwood ( talk ) 09:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Rajasthan .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:23, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:RAJ is not a policy or guideline.  It is an essay on the quality of sources on the Indian caste system and those written by Britons or Briton diplomats and administrators or under the guidance and review of Briton administrators like Lepel Griffin, Michael MacAuliffe, Sir John Withers McQueen.  Indian historians like Sarkar's sources are used because historians today depend on their secondary work.  Sarkar is an eminent historian and is perfectly reliable.  Source still needs to be reviewed and verified.  RangersRus ( talk ) 15:00, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Even if WP:RAJ doesn't applies here it is still not a reliable source as per WP:AGE MATTERS and this is the only source used in the article thus it fails WP:GNG too.  Mnbnjghiryurr ( talk ) 04:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock.  RangersRus ( talk ) 16:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If old sources have become obsolete due to coverage in new sources then AGE matters and it does not apply here.  Multiple sources are expected but there is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage.  RangersRus ( talk ) 11:27, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Just found it at RSN.  Hope this helps to evaluate the reliability of Jadunath Sarkar.  Based.Kashmiri (🗨️) 16:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] * Delete , it clearly fails WP:GNG & there is only one sourced used in this article (Fall of the Mughal Empire by Jadunath Sarkar) which is not a reliable source as per WP:AGE MATTERS .  Mnbnjghiryurr ( talk ) 03:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock.  RangersRus ( talk ) 16:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I had to wait to be able to find the source on the page for verification.  Source by Sarkar has enough coverage from page 191 to 193 on the siege.  The name of location is Barwada not Barwara (spelling error?).  Page passes general notability guidelines.  RangersRus ( talk ) 11:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete ,  as per Nom & it  fails WP:GNG Chauthcollector ( talk ) 12:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  21:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Malinaccier ( talk ) 00:32, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep There was indeed a siege of Barwara in 1757, and there are multiple good sources.  I see no reason to delete an article about a verified historical event.  My impression is that we don't have enough coverage of the global south, not an overabundance that requires aggressive pruning.  With that said, the article should probably be renamed, per @ RangersRus , unless there are other sources that say "Barwara".  Pecopteris ( talk ) 05:21, 11 June 2024 (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: keep