Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indians in Burmese History

: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 no consensus. The issue of merging can be discussed on the article's talk page. If merged, the history must be retained and a redirect left in place per WP:MAD. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

=[[Indians in Burmese History]]=

:{{la|Indians in Burmese History}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Indians in Burmese History}})

Massively and systematically biased article. Too many issues POV,OR,SYN,NPOV, see below Soewinhan (talk) 23:37, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

:Strong delete (nominator) -This article is just a collection of Indian related cases from Prehistory of Burma, Origins of Burmese Indians and History of Rakhine articles. As shown in its title, this article tries to highlight roles of Indians in Burmese history. That itself wrong in the first place. Because history of Burma is not only about Indians. Attempting to highlight violate WP:NPOV and WP:COI.

:Citations given are inaccurate and too many totally wrong claims like saying Pyu Kings were Maharajas.

:But, the reason I request to delete is that this article will always be biased. Because the subject matter is History of Burma, which involves too many cases and races in the cause of history. By this article itself, we are giving undue weight to Indian related cases. Soewinhan (talk) 23:58, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Merge selectively -- This is a substantial article with a lot of citations, and should not be deleted out of hand, becuase it offends the nom; if there is rubbish in it, this should be corrected. The substantive content appears to have two major themes - Pyu and the history of Arakan. As a border region facing the coast, it is almost inevitable that the history of Arakan should be separate from that of the core of Burma. Accordingly the material on that should be in a separate article, but we have one already, History of Rakhine. There is significant material on Pyu city-states, which might conveniently be merged there. When both these classes of material are merged (and removed), there will probably not be much left; if so, can then be deleted. BTW, the article Pyu city-states DOES say the kings were Maharajas. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ged UK 08:15, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^*poke* 20:33, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

No change -- I stand by my previous comment, but do not know enough to undertake the merge myself. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2011 (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.