Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ancient Pakistan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 redirect to History of Pakistan, which is much more detailed to the point that splitting it may be necessary in the near future. Anything to be merged can be found in the page history of this article. Kimchi.sg 02:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ancient Pakistan

In my opinion, a redirection link may function like deletion of that particular case. In some other case, a redirection link may work as an ad hoc arrangement, pending creation of sufficient contents for that particular page. The page, Ancient Pakistan either requires a distinct page or no page at all. However, a redirection link indicates that the page requires preservation. As such, I have reverted the edits and restored the contents. I place the page before a larger body of wikipedians for their assessment and views. Bhadani 10:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Strong Keep: A redirection link indicated that users may search the page. There are more than 3,500 google hits, and the term requires a separate page with a comprehensive contents. --Bhadani 10:59, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge any content not found in History of Pakistan and redirect because it appears to duplicate the content and purpose of that article, which goes back to ancient times (although the prehistory section in the prehistory section is not covered). Google will still bring up Wikipedia as a result in searches for Ancient Pakistan. Right now, History of Pakistan is the third result in a Google search for "Ancient Pakistan". -- Kjkolb 13:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
  • The area has an interloping and connected history with India, so ideally there should be only one article to discuss the ancient periods for India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. But that's a slightly different issue. Keep Rama's arrow 16:18, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect as per Kjkolb. Sorry Bhadani and Nirav, but I think in this case, there is little need to keep this page. Pakistan as an entity never existed prior to partition. All this page does it talk about history, and as such, it should be in the History of Pakistan. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 18:13, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: the delete tag was heavy-handed and approaches disrespect of some of our most productive editors. This could have been handled through simple, in-depth discussion to avoid hard feelings. While the content of this article does appear to duplicate much of History of Pakistan, the "History of Pakistan" article does seem quite long (it's 70kb) and it is normal for such long national history articles to be split into articles covering specific historical periods in greater detail. Ancient Egypt and Ancient China, for example, have in-depth articles of their own, and Pakistan is home to one of the four first river civilizations in the world, so there's no shortage of information about it. Since the "History of Pakistan" has grown too large, that article's individual sections on ancient history (some of which are quite in-depth) could be split out into the Ancient Pakistan article. But that is just one idea. Proposal: let's cool things down, remove the delete tag, and discuss respectfully. I hope people will be thoughtful about this and genuinely consider the material at hand, and what will be most beneficial to the content and our readers rather than being hot-headed about this. Badagnani 23:25, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect. I've checked the two articles and everything has already been covered in History of Pakistan article. If the History of Pakistan article is too long, we need a new article, but to "Ancient Pakistan" is not an appropriate title (Na, na I am not anti-Pakistani). Pre-colonial Pakistan, or something like that is more appropriate. utcursch | talk 06:28, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to History of Pakistan as that article appears to cover everything and is an good article. MLA 08:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect with History of Pakistan.--Idleguy 10:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
  • A rejoinder: At the outset, I would like to submit that tagging the page for deletion had nothing to do with any intent of showing any disrespect to any editor or group of editors – productive, un-productive; adamant or lenient, or otherwise. The page was facing problems akin to an “edit war” and edit summary like “Jesus…”; and under the circumstances, it was a signal that editor/s concerened did not deem it fit to have any discussion. As such, it was necessary in the interest of building the Project, to bring the issue to a wider audience of wikipedians. Having said this, I would like to state that implicit in the re-direction is acceptance of the fact that our users shall come to search for a page named Ancient Pakistan. As such, in my opinion a requirement exists for a separate page for Ancient Pakistan. The topic is perhaps being dealt with only in this style in many books of history though immediately I could not lay my hands on any such book. We all know that our opinions on any issue and the consensus would not change the historical truth. We have example(s) like page(s) Indian sub-continent, which had remained as a re-direction-page for long until some one knowledgeable came to add appropriate contents. Accordingly, It looks highly unusual to keep the present (and future) contents relating to history of people of Pakistan of ancient time in the page History of Pakistan and give them treatment and coverage as if there were an entity like Ancient Pakistan, and at the same time deny the same contents to an independent page named Ancient Pakistan. Are we creating sum total of human knowledge or contracting the same into minimum number of pages? While I do not believe in unnecessary fragmentation of topics and pages, I do believe that we should have necessary pages as required to build the Project. The business of merger and redirection in this fashion, if done on a continuous basis, may lead to a position when all pages relating to historical matters would lead to a single page named – History. However, as suggested by utcursch, we may rename this page, say, Ancient History of people of Pakistan or some similar name which does not tantamount to original research and/ or neologism. --Bhadani 08:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Ancient history of Pakistan seems to be an appropriate title. Suggestions welcome. utcursch | talk 12:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
It seems fine and an exact description of the position. More suggestions are most welcome. --Bhadani 10:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
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.