Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bih-sut

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 of the debate was Delete Babajobu 07:48, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bih-sut

Subject appears to be unverifiable via Google. Possible hoax or implausible typo. Muchness 05:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as unverifiable. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-05 06:56Z
• Delete as per Quarl. Sliggy 21:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep There's a reference to Bisut in Gakhar and a few Ghits - so it does look like a real place. Tribes names would often be similar to place names and the Arabic lettering is also correct. I'd like to see more verification but I don't think it's a hoax and it's quite a plausible transliteration from Arabic. Dlyons493 Talk 21:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment [1] gives Bisut as a place in Afghanistan. Dlyons493 Talk Dlyons493 22:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Punkmorten 13:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

• • Comment the article is about the Bih-sut, "a small tribe of Pakhto-speaking Afghans". There is no evidence for this tribe, even with Dlyons493 admirable efforts. Sliggy 16:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
    • That's absolutely correct - I was hoping someone could source it but they haven't. I'm changing my vote to Delete unless sourced. I'd now vote keep an article entitled Bisut about the place but there's so little info available that it's not worth starting. Dlyons493 Talk Dlyons493 00:19, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment I had a go at finding proof, but all I could find were maps that don't show the tribe, and so can't be used to prove or disprove the tribe's existence (since it can be argued that they are not detailed enough to show a small tribe), e.g. [2] [3] Sliggy 01:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

its real.

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.