Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newa Autonomous State

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. Sandstein 07:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Newa Autonomous State

[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)

Notability is not temporary. One event can have an event article if it's widely covered, but to have an entity article is completely misleading. The debate over autonomy and provinces in Nepal is already over. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 15:43, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 15:43, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment ‘Notability is not temporary’ does not mean that temporary, or even non-existent things cannot be notable. If there was a proposed Newa Autonomous State that attracted a significant amount of discussion and coverage then it may be notable. Mccapra (talk) 17:20, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:21, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:21, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This article doesn't qualify to be in Wikipedia. Ozar77 16:09, 18 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozar77 (talk • contribs)

Keep I don't see a rationale for deletion. Coverage such as [1] and [2] seems sufficient. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:50, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My rationale for nom was that the article is about the declared Newa state that was covered by news on the day of the declaration but nobody cared when it was tomorrow. There may be a case for a conceptual proposed state with a more sustained coverage under the same title, although it would require almost a complete overhaul of content. That is, in practice, it would still have to be a deletion, with only the title retained. As an article from a sock-farm dedicated to disruptive POV pushing, I deemed it prudent to ask the opinion of the community. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 21:38, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 17:18, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per Nom. - MA Javadi (talk) 17:10, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on what I can find in English sources which suggest that the call for this state was a brief flash in the pan in 2009. I see nothing suggesting an ongoing political movement or even sustained discussion about a proposed state. If I’ve missed this somewhere, or if there are sources in Nepali, please ping me and I’ll consider changing my !vote. Mccapra (talk) 03:50, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At least one major party proposed dividing Nepal into provinces based on ethnicity. There were about 2 dozens such ethnic divisions suggested at one time. One of those was an autonomous state for the Newar people, but a declared ethnic state by a definitive name, flag, territory, etc. would be one symbolic action by a protest one day in 2009, that was forgotten soon after. It was soon realised ethnic states would be impossible and the conversation on that ceased altogether. My memory tells me that some other ethnicities had built a strong movement that continued for years, before and after, but that wasn't the case in case of Newar people. And the sources seem to support that (I've looked). And, so, now I'm not even sure something like "Demand for an autonomous state for Newar people" deserves a stand-alone article. This one is a definite no for me, in any case. Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 07:53, 27 July 2019 (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.