Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anga area

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. – Joe (talk) 10:58, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anga area (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Lack of adequate citations. Jakichandan (talk) 14:41, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Anga area appears to be defined as where the Angika language is spoken. The absence of references comes from a content dispute in which another editor removed some valid references. This old version includes references. Jakichandan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) placed an AfD notice, and then removed a lot of text, followed by adding a {{csd-a3}}. I added a reference, which Jakichandan then reverted. I am not interested in edit warring, but I would encourage an uninvolved editor to revert to an old version such as this one. I do not think the article should be speedy-deleted, particularly when the apparent lack of context comes from an unjustified edit. I take no position on whether Angika is a dialect of Maithili language, which seems to be under dispute here. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per this discussion, I've restored the missing references and content for now, and take no position on the article's notability at this time. The addition of {{csd-a3}} clearly was incorrect. Firsfron of Ronchester 17:52, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Eastmain and Firsfron: I have tried to explain my case here. Regards.–Jakichandan (talk) 22:49, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete/merge It seems Angika should be able to provide the area it's spoken in. Sources are not clear that this is a distinct region. Reywas92^Talk 13:09, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: couldn’t find any source that establishes this as a distinct area in India. The books cited in the article don’t seem to contain the word Anga in them.defcon5 (talk) 08:32, 23 September 2021 (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.