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 delete. The original article is userfied at User:Sitush/List of Jat clans to allow the category to be checked against the list contents. SpinningSpark 18:53, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Jat clans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has a peculiar recent history. It spent a long while as an unreferenced article full of names of what were, presumably, Jat clans, but were not cited as such. Editors tightened up on the requirement for citations and random new names were refused unless cited. After a long while an editor made a bodl edit and removed all uncited names from the list. At this point new additions virtually ceased, as the history shows. The few that arrived uncited were rejected.

Enough time has passed since the deletion to make the deduction that the article is a list too far.

What seems apparent is that this article is not required. A valid outcome is to remove it and to merge its content insofar as it is valid and valuable, to Jat people, the stated main article, and set this article as a redirect to that one. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Relist? It seems that editors who have seen this page have little interest in the article one way or the other, so relisting would be advisable at the expiry of the normal listing period, unless a flurry of activity says differently. A valid assumption could be made because the article is flagged correctly at its head that no editors are interested in its retention. The article history shows supreme apathy after the large excision of material. To me it looks as if relisting in order to do our best to build a consensus one way or the other is the most useful approach for Wikipedia. Your mileage may vary, of course. I'd consider relisiting it myself, but I have no idea how to handle the obviously simple formalities. But, since it's a procedural matter, someone versed in procedure might be the better choice. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:59, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:03, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - easily meets the criteria for a notable list. There are sources correctly listed at the end of the article with clear indication that the items were derived from them, and the list contains a large number of bluelinked Jat clan names - I have checked several of them and all appear to be genuine Jat clan articles. I do not wish to comment on the article's history in any detail as it is not relevant here, but I do not agree with nom's deduction that some unjustified content deletions, time passing and few available editors add up to reason for deletion. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:01, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some more reliable published sources to the list, and have created some dozens of individual name references. Anyone with the energy to scan through Rose will find many more, though the spellings vary. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:47, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Delete - H. A. Rose is not a reliable source, nor is Ram Swarup Joon (an article about whom was deleted earlier this year). There are also doubts concerning Thakur Deshraj. I could go on and, yes, I do accept the issues relating to systemic bias, but the article history is directly relevant here. This is one of many absolutely appalling lists in the Indic caste sphere. - Sitush (talk) 13:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Actually, I've just stripped most of the sources out of the thing. For example, Tyagi's Martial Races is a known mirror of our content; Rose's work was based on the extremely inaccurate scientific racism methods used for British Raj 19th century censuses; both Dahiya and Joon are fringe theorists, etc. The fact that the article has a lot of blue links is itself of little significance because most of those links are generic across numerous castes/communities - it's like saying "Smith is an English name, but it is also found in the US, Canada, Australia". I am changing to delete - Sitush (talk) 13:56, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Note that the article in this state after the excision f the many links now has references, but these are only for the opening paragraph, a paragraph which is, in various forms, part of the many other articles dealing with Jats. The article now contains (again) a welter of buelinks, but these are not stated with any verification to be Jats. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:09, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I can't see how this would not be more useful as a category, which by the way, is not my usual stance. Bearian (talk) 17:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree with you, and that is not my usual opinion either. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:44, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm inclined to close this if one of you indicates you are willing to do the necessary work to create and populate the suggested category. Otherwise a relist may be more appropriate. SpinningSpark 15:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• If you can provide me with a copy of the article then I'll do it in batches over the next few days. I probably know more about the subject matter than do the others here anyway. - Sitush (talk) 16:07, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Actually, see Category:Jat clans. - Sitush (talk) 16:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]