AfDs for this article:

    The given page title was invalid or had an inter-language or inter-wiki prefix.

    It may contain one or more characters which cannot be used in titles.

Marwat (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log • Stats)
(Find sources: "Marwat"news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images)

Non-notable, unsourced, unverifiable, self-promoting article about a "tribe" with no encyclopedic characteristics. Tags have been removed more than once in the past. Article is basically orphan. Only articles liked to it are about non-notable individuals that should also be PROD'd. WP:NOTDIR and WP:NOTFORUM seem to apply here. Also fails WP:GNG in "significant coverage", "reliable sources", "independent of the subject". WP:NRVE is also an issue. Loukinho (talk) 07:49, 20 June 2012 (UTC) Also, it is worthy to note that the first nomination has not properly addressed the issue of notability. Only two "references" point to 3 pages of a subjective mention on a book whose existence and publication can't even be confirmed AND a link to a map. None of which seem to confer notability to the subject. Further reading is equally filled with unverifiable books and information. -- Loukinho (talk) 19:32, 20 June 2012 (UTC).

In what way are the books listed unverifiable? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
It surprises me that you ask that because you seem to be an experienced editor. The books have NO ISBN, no availability, non-notable books (SEE WP:OR and WP:QS). Further, take note that NONE OF THE BOOKS ARE BEING USED AS REFERENCE which should be cited IN-LINE with the text. Also, many of the books could very well not exist for verifiability or not even touch the subject. It should be more than a trivial mention. As a fellow editor, you are welcome to add this information if you find them. -- Loukinho (talk) 00:43, 22 June 2012 (UTC).
  • Keep. I think the article is notable enough, since there are articles about other neighboring tribes in the regions (Wazir, Zadran and many others). Marwats should have their own article, although references need to be added to it as it needs to have sourced and verifiable content. I found some other articles does mention the Marwat tribe although they don't link to it. Khestwol (talk) 08:52, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Comment: Keep in mind that just because other articles exist, it doesn't mean that all similar articles should. WP:OTHERSTUFF explains in further detail: "Plenty of articles exist that probably should not. Equally, because articles must wait for someone who is interested in the subject to notice they are missing before they are created, a lot of articles do not exist that probably should. So just pointing out that an article on a similar subject exists does not prove that the article in question should also exist; it is quite possible that the other article should also be deleted but nobody has noticed it and listed it for deletion yet.". Also it is important to remember that just because it exists, it doesn't mean that it has been subject of significant coverage. Further, notability requires the presence of in-depth and significant treatment of a subject in reliable independent sources. None of which seem to be the case in this article. -- Loukinho (talk) 09:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC).
  • Keep per Khestwol's rationale. The article also has plenty of Further Reading links which may be useful as sources. It has potential for verifiability and is adequately written and organized. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:32, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Comment: No question it is adequately written and organized, however that alone is not grounds for notability. An article about "My Special Garage Band" could be very well written and organized and even look like the article on Aerosmith for instance. But, if it has no VERIFIABLE SOURCES and SIGNIFICANT COVERAGE it is still not worthy of an encyclopedia. Further, much of the information currently there is not encyclopedic. None of the "further reading" are links!!! The existence of these books (which are NOT being used as references) can't even be confirmed! Remember that an article should have verifiable coverage as WP:NRVE clearly explains. PLEASE read the rationale for nomination. -- Loukinho (talk) 19:32, 20 June 2012 (UTC).
Comment: Significance coverage doesn't seem to be an issue for this article, because obviously the article is about a large tribe of Lakki Marwat District. Khestwol (talk) 20:25, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Comment: In this case, please show me all of the newspaper articles that back up your reference. Also, this is a great way to explain that notability it NOT inherited. While the region of Lakki Marwat is notable, Marwat tribe can't be unless significant coverage (press, media, articles, documentaries and movies) are present and verifiable. See WP:INHERIT. -- Loukinho (talk) 00:00, 21 June 2012 (UTC).
Comment: See Google books results for the Marwats.[1] Khestwol (talk) 19:24, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Comment: Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention. -- Loukinho (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Much better than "press, media, articles, documentaries and movies" are books and scholarly papers. Have you, Loukinho, looked at the books cited in the article, or investigated what else can be found by Google Books and Google Scholar searches? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:39, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Comment:You are welcome to go ahead and add them to the article. I am not the one preventing you. Remember, though, that WP:GNG says that sources should address the subject directly in detail, sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability. Also, sources for notability purposes, should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. Also, can't be self-published or works affiliated with the subject (And I'm not pulling these words out of nowhere. They're straight from the general notability guideline. Word for word).
Further, WP:NRVE suggests that the information should be VERIFIABLE. In other words, it can't be a book I wrote myself or a book that has never been published or an academic article that is nowhere to be found or something that somebody said. Books, should, then, have ISBN to be found and be verified. I mean, just because a book says that Hobbits exist doesn't mean we're gonna take it at face value, right? Much less when it is considered ORIGINAL RESEARCH. Academic, peer-reviewed research is a different ball game. But anybody can publish anything in favor or against anything else. WP:OR is very specific over WHICH KINDS of books are considered reliable sources: "books published by university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses". My point is that, it is not up for us to decide, but rather, it is our responsibility AS EDITORS to make sure that we're backing up everything we say and that anybody can go ahead and double check it. And that the source is reliable enough to not be misleading.
Moreover, I am not preventing anybody from editing this article and contributing. I am contesting, however, its notability. There is a HUGE difference between finding references for LAKKI MARWAT (which is plenty and abundant) and MARWAT TRIBE (which seems to be a subsect/faction of society). All I can find refers to LAKKI MARWAT. And RELIABLE sources have been proven hard to find. Including the books mentioned in the article or all 3 pages of references given in the reference section. The other link refers to a very unreliable source that doesn't meet the criteria and is WP:QS. -- Loukinho (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2012 (UTC).

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions.• Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
This article uses material from the Wikipedia article Articles for deletion/Marwat (2nd nomination), that was deleted or is being discussed for deletion, which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Author(s): Phil Bridger Search for "Articles for deletion/Marwat (2nd nomination)" on Google
View Wikipedia's deletion log of "Articles for deletion/Marwat (2nd nomination)"

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.