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. In hindsight, it was inadvisable to bundle the nominations of these pages together into a single AfD. The AfD has been withdrawn by the nominator. No prejudice against creating AfDs for individual articles, if desired. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 16:11, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of Iranian dynasties and countries[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

I am nominating the following pages:

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

(related simultaneous CfD: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 12#Berber dynasties, also involving Category:Iranian Muslim dynasties, Category:Kurdish dynasties, Category:Former Kurdish states, and the latter's 4 subcategories.)

Follow-up to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Turkic dynasties and countries. WP:OR/WP:SYNTH, fail WP:LISTCRITERIA (the lists equivalent of WP:NONDEFINING), and long series of precedents confirming that language family is WP:NONDEFINING for countries, territories, dynasties, and individual people. Many users at the "Turkic" AfD urged me to nominate the "Iranian" list and similar lists as well, so here they are. Additional suggestions are welcome if I have missed anything. I'll file the categories separately because it is a different procedure with different criteria, but the fundamental issues are the same, and I'm mentioning it for everyone's information. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:40, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Geography, and Lists. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:40, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Maintaining such content on Wikipedia under overarching categories like 'Germanic dynasties and countries' can inadvertently fuel ethnic nationalism, leading to prolonged debates and contentious issues between Iranian Wikipedia users and users from other communities. What we need to understand is that these peoples and states were not brothers but rather distant cousins, many of them were unaware of their connections during their respective reigns. Instead of allowing Wikipedia to become a battleground for historical disputes and ethnic nationalism, our focus should be on fostering an environment of mutual respect. In line with recent deletions, it appears that Arab and Turkic dynasty lists have also been removed. It seems that Arab and Turkic dynasty lists have also been deleted. Deleting such things might create a more peaceful atmosphere.
Akatziri (talk) 12:44, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For somewhat related reasons, I have also successfully nominated Category:Germanic empires, Category:Germanic rulers etc. for deletion a few months ago. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:13, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --HistoryofIran (talk) 09:53, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update I have submitted the related simultaneous CfD: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 12#Berber dynasties, also involving Category:Iranian Muslim dynasties, Category:Kurdish dynasties, Category:Former Kurdish states, and the latter's 4 subcategories. This is a separate procedure, your comments and votes here don't "count" for the categories, so please (also) participate in the CfD discussion if you have an opinion on what should happen to the categories. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:14, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I see the problem here - List of Kurdish dynasties and countries is well sourced, for instance, as is List of Pashtun empires and dynasties. I don't understand the LISTCRITERIA argument either as some of these lists have very clear criteria, and the WP:OR argument requires that no sources have discussed these articles. I'm not a topic expert, but's not clear to me why the WP:OR has been levied for some of these articles. I can understand the Iranian one a little bit, but it still seems like it could be a potentially valid list under WP:LISTN. So there's something here I'm clearly not understanding about these nominations apart from the fact the Iranian article could be cleaned up. SportingFlyer T·C 10:22, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what was "Pashtun" about Hamidullah Khan (r. 1926-1949), for example? His entire article doesn't mention it. He was an "Indian Muslim", and it seems like English and/or Hindustani were his native/professional languages. So why should we consider him part of a "Pashtun dynasty"?

According to the scope of List of Pashtun empires and dynasties, states, princely states, empires and dynasties in the regions of Central, Western and South Asia which were founded by rulers of Pashtun ancestry are automatically "Pashtun" in their entirety. In the case of Bhopal State, some Pashtun soldier named Dost Mohammad of Bhopal became a warlord and founded Bhopal State in 1707. This is an ancestor of Hamidullah Khan, whose family over the course of 200 years became significantly Indianised. Although he was still a Muslim, there is not a trace of "Pashtun" heritage. WP:COP-HERITAGE also says The heritage of grandparents is never defining and rarely notable. Identifying every descendant of A as "Pashtun", no matter how many generations, just because A was a Pashtun, is quite a stretch and WP:NONDEFINING/WP:OR/WP:SYNTH. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:12, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hamidullah Khan also isn't listed in the List of Pashtun empires and dynasties, either, but "Pashtun dynasty" brings up a decent number of hits in scholarly sources, so there are definitely dynasties that are defined by being Pashtun. Whether that includes the entire dynasty or not isn't really a notability issue, but a content issue for the talk page, and certainly isn't an argument for deleting the entire page.

I would suggest nominating each of these individually over time so we can have a discussion about them, as these articles are not closely related enough to delete them as a group. One may be WP:SYNTH but I see some decently sourced, potentially valid articles here. SportingFlyer T·C 13:34, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you're right. I've already made Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Arabian Houses a separate AfD (see "Update" below). The Pashtun list turns out to be a bit more complicated than I expected, and cannot lean on the language family argument because Pashto is a single language. There is disagreement about whether there is 1 or multiple Kurdish language(s). A similar problem exists with the Mongol states, which were Turkicised over time, but many probably began with the same common language of Middle Mongol. I assumed that "Maratha" referred to language family, but it can mean Maratha (caste) and Marathi language. I guess I've been (uncharacteristically, hopefully) careless with this AfD. Perhaps I should withdraw this bundled nomination and start over, only nominating List of Iranian dynasties and countries again for now... Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep for Kurdish emirates. Plug the term into Google Scholar to see why. Srnec (talk) 12:41, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Royalty and nobility, Middle East, and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep Actually, I'd suggest close this car crash of an AfD as the lists cited are so wide and disparate, you're never going to get agreement on deleting the whole lot in one fell swoop. The list of Arabian Houses is not my favourite thing, but I see no reason for its deletion and certainly fail to see how discussing its deletion in among this whole other bunch of nominations is constructive. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:43, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update Alexandermcnabb has made a good point about List of Arabian Houses not really fitting this AfD bundle (I was already in doubts about that, to be honest), so I made it a separate AfD, to be assessed on its own terms: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Arabian Houses. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw (as nom) I've been a bit careless in bundling these pages together in a single nomination (more details in my reply to SportingFlyer). I'm glad people pointed this out. I'll withdraw this bundle and start over by nominating the pages separately after more thorough preparation. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Arabian Houses is still on. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:35, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nederlandse Leeuw, as there is an editor advocating Delete, this AFD can't be closed as Keep even with your withdrawal of the nomination. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh so as soon as anyone has !voted for any particular outcome, withdrawal is no longer possible? I didn't know that. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:15, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep List of Pashtun empires and dynasties, but it should be worked upon to add more reliable citations. Noorullah (talk) 14:38, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete List of Iranian dynasties and countries in line with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Turkic dynasties and countries and weak keep the rest. Aintabli (talk) 06:59, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The Turkic one had an issue of being very little defined and as well as disputed. Pages like List of Pashtun empires and dynasties are very clear especially in the pages description that said dynasties were Pashtun in origin. @Aintabli See the point above in the discussion between SportingFlyer and Nederlandse Leeuw. Noorullah (talk) 20:03, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Noorullah21 I have revised my vote. Aintabli (talk) 12:13, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Kurdish emirates, Neutral on List of Mongol states, and Delete the rest per the previous AfD. I think the Kurdish emirate one is fine for notability as it was a unique and linear circumstance that has received scholarly attention, while the Mongol states one is different enough than the others to warrant a separate discussion. Curbon7 (talk) 22:18, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keepfor the Kurdish dynasties which is apparently well sourced and as to my knowledge had the collaboration of some well respected editors. The Kurdish emirates I'd keep as well, not all of them have their own articles. On the rest I have no opinion.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:34, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For the closer of the discussion: The delete and keep votes are often not meant for all articles. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:38, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. It seems that some of the nominees will get enough votes for a keep, while others will get enough votes for a delete. This is gonna be a complicated tally. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:20, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete For the list of Iranian dynasties and countries. As for the rest, please start individual AfDs. Sutyarashi (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Lists. Keep and expand/improve Kurdish emirates. --Mann Mann (talk) 02:24, 17 June 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.