Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maratha–Nizam wars

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. Star Mississippi 12:13, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maratha–Nizam wars

Maratha–Nizam wars (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

This article clearly fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. Shellwood (talk) 16:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!!

I have noticed that there is a discussion happening about the articles on the Maratha-Nizam wars. I am eager to participate and cast my vote for the article. After thoroughly reviewing the content, I have concluded that it comprehensively covers all the necessary information, supported by reliable sources in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines.I think that all the paragraphs in the article accurately depict the context and are verifiable according to Wikipedia guidelines

WP:VERIFY

.

Here is one source that mentioned it as maratha nizam wars:

•Britannica:[1]

•Britanicca(for further details):[2]

• I think britannica is a better and clearly citing source for the article.It's verifiability and reliability can be checked at ->

•[3]

Timeline isn't mentioned in the heading of article but it is mentioned in the infobox.If there are any doubts some some sources are definitely needed for a better understanding about the timeline with the citation.But if article is undergoing deletion because of it's heading than the Britannca is one of the sources that cites it as 'Maratha -Nizam War' not as 'Anglo-Maratha War'.[4]

• Suggestion:It is recommended that the editors and administrators involved in this matter thoroughly examine all sources and make decisions from a neutral Favourable Renaming the article to 'Maratha-Nizam War' instead of 'Maratha-Nizam Wars' would be appropriate as the Britannica source also refers to it in the singular form, given that the article primarily covers individual battles rather than overarching conflicts.

Thanks!! Kemilliogolgi (talk) 10:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know what you mean, but the source you shared doesn't cover the Maratha-Nizam war in its body instead it spun around the Anglo-Maratha wars. If you'll search "Maratha-Nizam war" under Britannica's sort searching then you won't find any article on Maratha Nizam war through filter searching under Britannica again I don't know how you concluded that it covers this topic while we don't find a single article on it. We know that Britannica is

WP:RS but as I said it doesn't even cover this topic so kindly provide sources for Maratha-Nizam war 1720-1819.
Timeline isn't mentioned in the heading of article but it is mentioned in the infobox, that's the issue we don't find this particular timeline in any source. The author too is clearly aware of this therefore they didn't cite any source for this timeline. It's clearly a mix of several hostilities between Nizam, Marathas, Anglos and French and represented as "Maratha Nizam war". Based Kashmiri (talk) 11:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

1. [5]
2. [6]
3. [7]
4. [8]
5. [9]
6. [10]
7. [11]

822 results in JSTOR [12] almost 3,000 results in ProQuest[13]. and we have several other sources that do not explicitly mention "Maratha-Nizam wars" but provide detailed descriptions of the entire conflicts (a lot in the article itself). I will await the nominator to post the synthesized part on the talk page. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, not a platform for someone to boast their ego.--Imperial^[AFCND] 16:50, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator clearly lacks an understanding of what, then why don't you show us a single source covering this event as Maratha-Nizam war (1720-1819)?
Neither the Anglo-Maratha wars nor the French-Maratha conflicts are included; technically, it's feasible to add them since the article's scope covers conflicts between two parties be sure. Is it conflicts or wars? It's clearly noticeable from the artificial timeline of this event (1720-1819) that it's heavily synthesized.
the Nizam and the Marathas, regardless of whether they were supported by the British East India Company, the French, or any other entities. I am listing the sources that explicitly state "Maratha-Nizam War Now that is

WP:DONTHOAX

. Now let us look at the sources provided by you. The first two sources are identical.

• [14] only gives insights of Maratha-Nizam war of 1751-52 but there's no Maratha nizam war 1720-1819 as currently the timeline decided by the author.
• The third one [15] only talks about Maratha-Nizam hostilities of 1785-1787 again there's no mention of Maratha-Nizam war 1720-1819.
• Fourth source [16] is not accessible so it'd be helpful if you provide a quotation for the Maratha-Nizam war 1720-1819.
• Coming to the 5th source [17] again not accessible so provide a quotation for Maratha-Nizam war 1720-1819
• Next [18] only found a topic of "Maratha-Nizam relations" I wonder if this led you to the conclusion of Martha-Nizam war 1720-1819.
• At last, [19] this also can't be accessed so provide a quotation for Maratha-Nizam war 1720-1819.

Now coming to filter/sort keyword searching through JSTOR and ProQuest. Anyone can see that, It gives NO result for even the "Maratha-Nizam War" as a whole forget including timeline, all we see is individual results for Maratha and Nizam. So that's how you concluded that it has almost 3800 results (from both JSTOR and ProQuest)?
You have yourself yelled that we have several other sources that do not explicitly mention "Maratha-Nizam wars" but provide detailed descriptions of the entire conflicts hence proved it contains synthesis. And above too the sources provided by you don't give insights of Maratha-Nizam war 1720-1819.Based Kashmiri (talk) 03:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ImperialAficionado Indeed Wikipedia is a collaborative project therefore we have to make sure that an article shouldn't exist in mainspace as long as it doesn't pass general notability, and contains synthesis, original research and POVFORK. And No one is being egoistic here. Why do you think so?Based Kashmiri (talk) 03:53, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:UCS. The "Maratha–Nizam wars" basically ends with the fall of the Marathas, as their conflicts lasted till then. The article body covers the contributions of the Nizam for the fall of the Marathas. Cheers. Imperial^[AFCND] 07:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

I literally showed how the sources provided by you (most of them don't even cover "Maratha-Nizam war" but cover some relations and hostilities). We just need a single source for the specific Maratha-Nizam war 1720-1819 and I'll pull off the prod with myself. Maratha–Nizam wars" basically ends with the fall of the Marathas, as their conflicts lasted till then. At least provide a source to back your statements, this is

WP:UCS doesn't give you waivers for extending the timeline on your own. We're still waiting for you to provide sources for your defined Maratha-Nizam war (1720-1819).Based Kashmiri (talk) 10:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Keep Nominators arguments are nowhere found in the article. I don't understand how this doesn't pass
  WP:GNG. Suggesting the nominator to keep personal bias away, as it seems to be the problem here.--DeepstoneV (talk) 18:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  "Nominators arguments are nowhere found in the article. I don't understand how this doesn't pass WP:GNG." You also didn't understand that a screenshot from YouTube video is not a reliable source (at Gupta empire talk page), I already replied how this article is fully based on WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, POVFORK and it doesn't passes general notability. Feel free to reply to my response below. Based Kashmiri (talk) 04:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh dear, you're taking everything personally. What was the reason to drag another discussion here? Please don't continue this thread, or use other talk pages. Imperial^[AFCND] 07:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @ImperialAficionado it'd be better if you give this advice to DeepstoneV as at first they accused me of having Personal bias. Based Kashmiri (talk) 14:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This article appears to amalgamate various wars without citing any reliable sources that acknowledge such a conflict by this name. The timeline presented (1720-1819) seems implausible, and the outcome is equally questionable. Even if the Nizam’s actions in Anglo-Maratha Wars contributed to the Maratha downfall, that could be the subject of a separate article. It’s not appropriate to include it in a comprehensive conflict spanning over a century. This inclusion could distort the narrative and lead to misinformation. A MUST DELETE ONE! --Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 08:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  In that case, we might also have to delete

  Ahom-Mughal conflicts, Roman–Persian Wars, Roman–Parthian Wars....etc. Imperial^[AFCND] 08:11, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  And probably Ghaznavid campaigns too! Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 08:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @

  WP:OTHERCONTENT but since you already gone off topic so I'd respond to it.
  In Roman–Persian Wars and Roman–Parthian Wars the dates and timeline of the wars are already cited in the lead but that's not the case in Maratha–Nizam wars you have not cited any source in the lead or even in the article body to support your preferred timeline of 1720-1819 neither you're providing sources here for this timeline.
  Similarly we can't do the same with Hundred Years' War and Seven Years' War because its timeline is affixed by scholars. Based Kashmiri (talk) 13:12, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Delete There was no prolonged war but the wars that happened time to time with each of them taking years of years. The article is misleading also because it was the British Empire who caused elimination of Maratha Empire, not Hyderabad State. Ratnahastin (talk) 11:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Delete, As per above comment Rawn3012 (talk) 02:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Can't find any source for this war either which is almost a hundred year timeline conflict.
  WP:EDPN
  .

Recommended: I'd suggest

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:44, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Page is
  WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 15:18, 18 May 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.