This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Mongolia. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Mongolia|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Mongolia. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Asia.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Mongolia/archive

Women in the Mongol Empire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:NOR Pollia (talk) 21:17, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, and Mongolia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:41, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This article is clearly sourced to more than 3 independent, reliable, published, secondary sources, all but one of which are fully accessible online. There is no basis for saying this is original research. It's also clearly a notable topic, with sources named "Women in the Mongol Empire", "Women in Steppe Society" and "Women and Gender under Mongol Rule". It's tagged for non-encyclopaedic style, but this is not a reason to delete, nor is improving the style of the article the purpose of AfD. RebeccaGreen (talk) 22:08, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural keep - I can't find any rationale for deletion. Just writing "WP:NOR" is not a compelling argument for deletion. The article is not tagged for OR, there is no discussion on its talk page regarding any suspicion of OR. And even if there would be any OR in the article, the remedy would be to edit and improve the article rather than bringing it to AfD. --Soman (talk) 00:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the topic is clearly notable from the sources provided and I don’t see any indication of OR. Mccapra (talk) 05:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above, the page very clearly has sourcing. Di (they-them) (talk) 22:00, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment appears to be student assignment: see Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/SUNY Binghamton University/Asian and American Women in Film (Winter 2024) PamD 07:00, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. the article is (correctly) tagged as reading more like a student essay than a well-written wikipedia article, but the cited sources demonstrate notability and obviate the claim of OR made by the nominator. there may be some issues of inappropriate synthesis or conclusion drawing, but as a whole they are style issues that can (and should) be fixed by editing. Eluchil404 (talk) 03:47, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]