Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chakma Kingdom

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Chakma Kingdom}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Chakma Kingdom}})

This article was recently proposed for merging into Chakma Circle (see discussion); however, several editors in the discussion had concerns about verifiability/hoax material and recommended deletion instead, so I am taking to AfD for review. I note that the article creator has now been blocked for copyright infringement and that some of their other articles have been flagged as hoaxes – see, for example, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chakma martial arts. Courtesy ping for everyone involved in the merge discussion: {{ping|Mehedi Abedin|EmeraldRange|Worldbruce|UwU.Raihanur|Imwin567|Vinegarymass911|p=}}. Zeibgeist (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Bangladesh, and Myanmar. Zeibgeist (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete: WP:TNT is the best option here. I have not had time to look up every footnote but of the sampling I selected, there are significant problems: {{tq|Chakma, B. (2010). Buddhism and Ethnic Conflict in the Chittagong Hill Tracts. New York: Routledge, pp. 32–34}} and {{tq|Uddin, S. (2019). The Chittagong Hill Tracts: Living with a Dilemma. Routledge. pp. 75–77}} are completely fabricated; the ISBNs offered do not exist. {{tq|Khan, A. (1998). The Chakmas: An Ethno-Historical Study. Dhaka: University Press Limited, p. 142}} also appears to be completely fabricated. {{tq|van Schendel, Willem (2000). The Chittagong Hill Tracts: Living in a Borderland. University of Washington Press. pp. 89–91}} [https://archive.org/details/chittagonghilltr0000sche/page/n7/mode/2up is real], but the publication date and publisher are wrong and the quote it purports to supply does not appear anywhere in the book, much less pages 89-91. {{tq|Lewin, T.H. (1869). The Hill Tracts of Chittagong and the Dwellers Therein (PDF). Bengal Printing Company. pp. 18–20}} is a frequently used source, but these citations fail verification. For example, footnote 5 offers up a quotation that [https://ia801307.us.archive.org/31/items/cu31924023625936/cu31924023625936.pdf does not appear] on the purported page number or anywhere else. Bottom line this article fails WP:V and somewhere between a substantial portion or all of it may be a WP:HOAX. It needs to be removed from mainspace. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:49, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete TNT applies. This is a AI-generated clusterfuck. My thoughts reflect that of @Dclemens1971 Sohom (talk) 02:25, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as per above discussion. And, Every info in the article is already pretty much written within the Chakma Circle and Chakma people#History. Imwin567 (talk) 05:21, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete See User talk:Tsawzhak#Research conduct for my analysis of a third of the citations. "Fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism" sums it up. A few editors made good faith efforts to improve this train wreck of an article. The pages cited for the start date of the "kingdom", for example, have been corrected, but the book is by a non-expert, Chitta Ranjan Chakma, and is self published, [https://hsrapublications.com/packages/] so we shouldn't be using it. There is nothing worth salvaging. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:26, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as per WP:HOAX. Mehedi Abedin 08:05, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as a WP:HOAX, needs blowing up jolielover♥talk 18:43, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as per above discussion. RAIHAN ⚡ Got something to say? 20:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as per above discussion & WP:HOAX. Bongan^® →TalkToMe← 13:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

:Delete, this is far more of an elaborate hoax than the Chakma martial arts article. Nearly all of the references don't seem to exist at all, besides a single self-published source written by a non expert. Absolutely none of the identifiers (ISBN, DOI, etc.) or links are valid, or link to the supposed source they claim to.

:As I've said before, it seems like the article author is just including a crapton of made up, AI-generated offline citations in hopes that nobody will check to see if they exist. ApexParagon (talk) 00:46, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

::Note: The creator of this article also tried adding the supposed "ensign of Chakma Raj" to the Chakma Circle article. He had uploaded this file himself to Commons. I cannot find any proof that they ever used this as an ensign.

::When I tried reverse searching the image, the only matches I found were from a WordPress article and a Facebook post. Not great sourcing wise.

::This is the same image that is the supposed "coat of arms" in the Chakma Kingdom article, and that he included on the supposed flag of Chakma, which he also uploaded to Commons himself and added to the Chakma people article...

::This is a VERY elaborate hoax. Christ. ApexParagon (talk) 01:07, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

:::He added a different version of the flag to the "Chakma Sidebar" template... good grief ApexParagon (talk) 01:14, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

::::(note: i have reverted all of these edits, you can see them in the edit history) ApexParagon (talk) 03:57, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Also, worth noting the article creator in question (User:Tsawzhak) has already been indefinitely blocked for repeatedly uploading copyrighted images. Though this is not relevant to the discussion at hand. ApexParagon (talk) 01:22, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.