Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mishra's of Pratap Nagar (Ramouli)
- 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. KTC (talk) 13:53, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
- Mishra's of Pratap Nagar (Ramouli) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contextless unsourced and incoherent WP:OR with no indication of significance Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:37, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Likely obscure Indian nobility. For context, Mishra is a surname used by the Brahmins (noble/higher class in India). However, according to the article the Mishra family of Pratap Nagar or Ramouli (both of which appear to be small villages in Bihar, according to Google searches), is not Brahmin but Kshatriya, a military or governing class. "Thakur" could be either the title (used by some rulers of princely states) or the surname. Article's creator hasn't really made clear if these particular Mishras did rule a princely state (in which case they would be analogous to a small European noble house), or whether they had a less important position. Either way, there aren't likely to be any sources that could verify any of this, so deletion it has to be. IgnorantArmies (talk) 09:17, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete -as nonsense. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 12:30, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Incomprehensible, has no reliable sources for whatever it is. B E C K Y S A Y L E S 05:24, 23 January 2015 (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.