Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tirukkural translations into Rajasthani

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 no consensus‎. Individual articles may be merged or nominated for deletion at editorial discretion, but it seems that a consensus to delete all is unlikely to arise. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:15, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tirukkural translations into Rajasthani

[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)

Already covered in Tirukkural translations. No proof of WP:Notability on its own accord. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, India, Rajasthan, and Tamil Nadu. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because

most of references are same
no notability of individual translations
The article article Tirukkural translations covers it:

)

--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:38, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I looked at the User talk page of one editor who created many of these articles and from the looks of it, they were only informed that this deletion discussion concerned one article they created. Redtigerxyz, could you leave a personal note, informing them of the extent of this AFD? It would be fair to do so and I'd appreciate you taking care of this step. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:33, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Liz, Done.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this is all a bit of a mess, with the information spread and duplicated across umpteen articles in a way that really cannot be helpful to the reader, but condensing it all, without losing useful stuff, is going to be a nightmare. I'm not sure it's fair to expect the major contributor to do the whole thing in the time-span of an AfD. The problem starts with
List_of_Tirukkural_translations_by_language which duplicates itself as both a table and a list-of-lists, with the table very unhelpfully linking to Wikipedia's general articles on the languages rather than to the articles about the translations. If I'm looking up English translations of this work, I expect to be taken to Tirukkural translations into English, not English. But now, as well as that directory of individual articles on translations to each language, we have Tirukkural translations which is a master-table organised by language, and we have each sub-section of the master-table corresponding to a single language duplicated as a separate article, for example, Tirukkural translations into French. These have some additional text in most cases, setting things in context. I note that the nominator has not included Tirukkural translations into English in the nomination, presumably because it has more text than most. One helpful way out of this might be to condense everything, including the article on English translations, into Tirukkural translations, but rather than presenting a single enormous table here, present all the individual tables one after the other, with introductory paragraphs where necessary between them - in effect, make it a composite article with a section on each language, sections arranged alphabetically, each section with a table of translations where it's helpful to do so (i.e. where there are more than one or two translations, and there's a desire to compare them). But I'm scared that if the editors who've put so much work into this already actually do this, someone will look at the resulting article and say "too long, and has anyone discussed the translations of this work as a global subject?" and nominate the result for deletion... Elemimele (talk) 10:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Elemimele, I believe Tirukkural translations into English can be retained as a daughter article from Tirukkural translations; English translations table should be removed from here. Most (if not all) of other articles in Category:Tirukkural translations by language need to be deleted. I may have missed an article or two in the category in this deletion. Individual articles need to notable. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm concerned some might be both notable and long enough that they should be kept, like Tirukkural translations into Sanskrit eg Tirukkural translations into Arabic. It appears none should be deleted outright as many have verifiable information not present in Tirukkural translations, and even some (most?) of the short ones are notable in their own right. The larger page could have a new section on the history of translations for each language, some of them summaries linking to the longer individual pages. Probably best discussed on the talk page, though. —siro χ o 10:46, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

siro, Checked Tirukkural translations into Sanskrit. Most of text includes date, title, author, place of publication - which is already covered in Tirukkural translations. Agree, there is some additional information in this article like first para of "History of translations", which can be easily incorporated into Tirukkural translations. I suggest that we can preserve this in draft space for checking, if required. I can work with the creator for integrating the text/ references, upon a consensus here. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Almost all 28 articles appear to meet our notability requirements, especially if you include the offline references.

More importantly, I oppose such a big and sweeping proposal to restructure this subject area through the use of one mass AfD. These articles vary in length and referencing. We are required to consider

ATD (alternatives to deletion)

, giving preference to alternatives, not to deletion. That gets complicated when you have so many articles -- and just seven days.

There's a lot of detail work here for someone to actually carry this out. Are you expecting the closing admin to do all this merging, redirecting and deleting? At least one template's going to need rework. There are 28 sets of "What links here" connections to check as well as red links to remove from other articles. See this discussion about another big set of deletions I was involved with:

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive354#Deletion/unlinking norms

I volunteered to help the closing admin and spent several hours on the follow-up to the deletions. That was easier because the articles were simple cookie-cutter stubs which these are not. There was no actual content to merge.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:55, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meaningless nomination. NavjotSR (talk) 16:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all All these could easily fit in a single table with appropriate references added. Many of them have a single table row definition. The articles are essentially duplicates of each of these except for the information related to the translation itself + language details. No where on wikipedia is this kind of article structure used. Delete them all, and reformat them into table article. scope_creep^Talk 18:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The table has been created prior to this, so they all redundant. scope_creep^Talk 18:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. None of these is individually notable, and it's hard to see that they even are collectively. The main article already contains (way too much) information on translations of the work. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:24, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The information here already looks to be covered by
reason for having dedicated articles for each of these. -Ljleppan (talk) 11:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete all for reasons others have provided.

talk) 17:38, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep all. Taking a deeper look, enough of these are individually notable by
WP:PAGEDECIDE argument here, but it's important to note, that that is virtually never used as a reason for deletion at AfD, and is occasionally a reason for merge. Given the sheer number of articles nominated, I think a a merge outcome here is overly prescriptive and we should let that happen editorially after this discussion closes. —siro χ o 01:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep all.
List of Tirukkural translations by language (which has been suggested to be merged) can be compared with List of Bible translations by language. Rasnaboy (talk) 04:30, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timothytyy (talk) 10:41, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all per Siroxo ,A. B. These 28 articles are individually notable and pass
WP:TRAINWRECK to nominate 28 artciles in one go.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:42, 7 November 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.