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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Xianbei-Wa War (185)

[edit]

[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)

This article about a purported war in 185 AD between the Inner Asian steppe nomads the Xianbei and the Wa of present-day Japan, is as fanciful as it appears. It lists three sources, which are, astonishingly enough, genuine, but none of them support the outlandish claim that the steppe nomads crossed the sea of Japan and fought the inhabitants there, nor any events of the year 185. The first source, "SGZ", apparently refers to Sanguo Zhi, and the cited passage talks about the reach of the Xianbei leader Tanshihuai - no mention of Wa of Japan. The second source, available online here, talks about Xiongnu burial rites and nothing about the Xianbei, let alone the Japanese. The last source notes that the Xianbei were defeated west of the Liao River in 177, a far cry from the grandiose claim that they forced the submission of the Wa and made them pay tribute. I must conclude this article is a hoax, and recommend that other articles by the same creator be scrutinized as well. _dk (talk) 07:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, China, Japan, and Mongolia. _dk (talk) 07:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete A11. I think we need to start cracking down on editors who simply invent battles/campaigns/wars etc. Mccapra (talk) 07:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: It looks like hoax to me, per A11. CSMention269 (talk) 07:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Seems purely made-up, should be deleted. Noorullah (talk) 08:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete - this is clearly bogus and agree that other contributions by this editor are likely deserving of additional attention. DCsansei (talk) 14:53, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete No results on Google or Scholar. Maybe one should take a closer look at the other user's articles too. Killarnee (talk) 21:26, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the same editor wrote Siege of Multan (1398), which has references that look likely to be spurious, if anyone has a moment to double-check this. -- asilvering (talk) 04:23, 12 February 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.