Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Radwan 1828

=[[:Battle of Radwan 1828]]=

:{{la|1=Battle of Radwan 1828}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Battle of Radwan 1828}})

Only one source that doesn't look RS (a site named yazidis.info that doesn't even exist anymore) and also very POV language ("because if they would not have won the whole Yazidi Population would have been destroyd" [sic]) and unsourced claims that could be controversial ("Before the Battle eyewitnesses said that the Kurds attacked the Yazidis many times there taking them as Sex Slaves and killing them") Laura240406 (talk) 21:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete. Not seeing anything to back this up in the search links. I tried taking "1828" off and seeing what it found but it's nothing relevant. If this topic is real, "Battle of Radwan" is not its correct name. Draft was rejected 4 times at AfC but unilaterally promoted to an article anyway. Given that the article says little, can prove even less, is strongly POV and is borderline incoherent with copious grammatical errors, I think this can be disposed of without any fear of losing anything of value. Even if there is a topic here, it would be far better to start from scratch working from some actual sources not a defunct blog that doesn't really say much or even point to anywhere else to find out more. I'd oppose returning it to draft as there is no sign of even the germ of a valid article here. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 22:21, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete - Reviewed this at AfC like a week ago, it was almost entirely LLM generated with only that Yazidi source. Given that nothing else to support this has come up since I'm not convinced that this even really happened. Even then, if this did in fact happen, it certainly does not fulfill WP:GNG if the only thing supporting its existence is that sort-of blog. I'm also strongly opposing draftifying as it is just wasting everyone's time for the original creator to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Radwan_1828&diff=prev&oldid=1288459524 move] it back despite repeated declines. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 22:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
Delete. Definitely not WP:NPOV and only source appears WP:QUESTIONABLE. Also see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ezidishingali. cyberdog958^Talk 23:29, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
Delete Support per nom. Kajmer05 (talk) 23:39, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:03, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
Speedy delete: WP:G5, I am certain the creator is a sock of {{user|MHD1234567890}} See SPI. Aintabli (talk) 01:05, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:CU results from the SPI, notes that the accounts are technically unrelated, but just a week or so ago, {{User|Doritoboritoa121}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Doritoboritoa121&oldid=1287460420 drafted] this same article on their userpage citing the same sources. I'm unsure if this is a case of WP:MEATPUPPETRY, but this is extremely suspicious. Aintabli (talk) 21:17, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

:Delete per nom. Only one source, not coming up online... various type edits needed... Tolozen (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

:Delete I agree with the nomination this article does not meet WP:RS, the sources are unreliable and biased (also only one of the sources are available) DataNomad (talk) 16:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)