Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistan Zindabad

: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 keep. T. Canens (talk) 05:10, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

=[[Pakistan Zindabad]]=

{{notavote}}

:{{la|Pakistan Zindabad}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pakistan_Zindabad Stats])

:({{Find sources|Pakistan Zindabad}})

Pakistan Zindabad is a slogan (meaning "Long Live Pakistan") (eg Pakistan Murdabad ) per WP:DICDEF,WP:COATRACK, WP:NEO. The WP:DICDEF article was wrongly created and then expanded by adding instances of any event available online whenever these slogans were chanted in public. This article is now serving as WP:COATRACK for editors pushing Kashmir related POV [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pakistan_Zindabad&diff=502953008&oldid=502951544] see Talk:Pakistan Zindabad . This AfD is in agreement with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3APakistan_Zindabad&diff=502955741&oldid=502951735 this RFC comment] DBigXray 15:46, 19 July 2012 (UTC

Past consensus on a similar article : Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pak Watan --DBigXray 16:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep National slogans, national anthems, phrases etc. are notable. "Pakistan Zindabad" has historical usage in the form of speeches, slogans, patriotism, music, battle cry etc. as proven by WP:RS and is highly notable. Mar4d (talk) 16:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

::This is neither a national slogan nor national anthem. and the so called WP:RS only mention the occasion when the phrase was used, and do not discuss them in detail as is expected from the subject of an article.--DBigXray 16:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Strong keep: there are numerous reliable sources present in the article which discuss the word in detail in all aspects. Notability is established and WP:BURDEN cleared. Also notable as a battle cry. Poor nomination. --lTopGunl (talk) 17:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

:* @Creator Thats incorrect the references used as source merely take the name. --DBigXray 17:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep: I consider it poor and not good faith nomination. Justice007 (talk) 17:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

::So far only the WP:COI editors have commented, lets wait what neutral editors have to say about it.--DBigXray 18:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

:::* Do you realy understand where that applies???.Justice007 (talk) 18:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

::::*yes very well. Please read WP:DISCUSSAFD--DBigXray 20:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

:::::*You know I gave you a chance to get out of this COI thing with dignity: but it appears you really wanna go down this road. Accusing fellow editors of WP:COI editing is a serious charge. I assume you have evidence of these violations and will be making a report at WP:COIN. If you do not have evidence that Mar4d, lTopGunl and Justice007 are engaged in COI editing, I will have to report you for making personal attacks. – Lionel (talk) 20:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

:::::::*Discussed on user talk:Lionelt --DBigXray 13:41, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

::::::*Also note that the same editor tried to oppose almost all statements at the DYK and nominated this article for deletion after it was promoted for the DYK. This AFD is disrupting that promotion. --lTopGunl (talk) 10:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

:::::::*TopGun you desperately need to read Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions#Arguments_to_the_person Interested editors are welcome to see why the community rejected those DYKs --DBigXray 13:41, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

  • keep Seems a legitimate term to me that is used widely in celebration Seasider91 (talk) 18:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:42, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:42, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep: uninvolved editor here. Obviously notable as a national slogan since WWII. Not the best written article--but ripe for improvement. More than enough sources to pass WP:N.– Lionel (talk) 19:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

::Please dont go by the count of WP:BOMBARDed ref, you will not find even a single ref that has discussed the phrase.--DBigXray 19:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

:::To that all I have to say is Pakistan Zindabad!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lionelt (talk • contribs)

  • Keep As it is considered a national slogan per Pakistan's own government[http://www.mofa.gov.pk/oman/contents.aspx?type=statements&id=4] And The Telegraph quote "The official national slogan of "Pakistan Zindabad" (long live Pakistan) has been changed to Pakistan Sai Zindha Bhaag (run away alive from Pakistan)."[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/5106443/Pakistan-school-fears-terrorism-as-threat-of-Iraq-style-violence-grows.html] Darkness Shines (talk) 19:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep Clearly notable and goes beyond a dictionary definition in the same manner as the US United we stand, divided we fall. This is a motto/phrase with clear significance to Pakistanis, not a definition. Ryan Vesey Review me! 22:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Delete Perfectly agree with User:DBigXray. Both Pakistan Zindabad and India Zindabad should be deleted from Wikipedia as these articles themselves tend to become cries of Jingoism. Also, both WP:COATRACK and WP:WWIN are applicable in these cases. These slogans have no independent encyclopedic value and the proponents of these articles trie to associate some India-Pakistan rivalry related stuff in these articles; this accounts to WP:COATRACK very well. Every country in this world has a slogan like "long live X (my country)" or "Victory for X" and how these slogans could find a place in an encyclopedia like our Wikipedia. Since the editor who created this article is from Pakistan, we could also doubt WP:COI in this case. There are enough sources, but are they fabricated? The very 1st source mentions this slogan in just one occasion and like this " For someone who chose to go to Pakistan post-1947, Manto was a deeply unhappy man - for all that had been promised prior was not delivered after. Upset because of the manner in which the sentiment of nationalism had been manipulated, Manto’s reluctant acceptance of the slogan ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ makes for a very telling moment in the play." The second source also has a single mention: " He conluded his speech with the slogans 'Pakistan Zindabad, India Zindabad'." (WP:OR). 3rd one is not accessible for me and the 4th source is also almost misused. Number of sources is not the real criteria; see what the WP policy says: "Or, the sources may not directly address the subject of the article, but instead give trivial details about it. An article could be interpreted as synthesis, a form of original research." It's clear case of fabrication and should urgently need an administrator's proper action. AshLey Msg 08:01, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Delete as per User:Ashley_thomas80 and User:DBigXray. But it should then be redirected to Pakistan Zindabad (song) which does have notability. Also a disambiguation needs to be created for Zindabad. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

:*If this is not kept, Pakistan Zindabad (song) may be better at Pakistan Zindabad. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep per Ryan Vesey; article goes beyond a simple dictionary definition. Cavarrone (talk) 08:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
  • keep it is national slogan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.47.214.21 (talk) 10:40, 21 July 2012 (UTC) This IP has been blocked as a sock of Highstakes00 Darkness Shines (talk) 14:08, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep - This is not anything like a simple dictionary definition. This is a well-sourced article about a national/political slogan, including its historical and current uses. Numerous reliable sources describe its uses. The fact that some contributors may have tried to convert the article into a WP:COATRACK is not a justification for deletion. --Orlady (talk) 00:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

::As you can see from [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pakistan_Zindabad&action=history the article history] the editors are ready to edit war to maintain the article as a COATRACK and have summarily reverted efforts of countering it.--DBigXray 13:46, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

:::If necessary, the article can be protected. We don't delete vandalism-prone articles to prevent them from being vandalized, and we don't need to delete controversial articles to prevent edit warring. --Orlady (talk) 14:09, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

  • [https://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Pakistan+Zindabad%22 3,910 book results] is an obvious keep. The sources do detail all the content in the article. --lTopGunl (talk) 11:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

::Please read Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions#Google_test Being a slogan it is expected to be chanted at occasions and these Google hits are only stating this.--DBigXray 13:36, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

:::Yup. There are around [http://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=stuff&btnG=#hl=en&tbm=bks&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22stuff+and+nonsense%22&oq=%22stuff+and+nonsense%22&gs_l=serp.12...13266.16782.1.19094.15.15.0.0.0.0.438.1827.10j4j4-1.15.0...0.0...1c.ZH5E3cdjJ0Y&psj=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=ad26c56ad335bb9d&biw=954&bih=826 93,700 books hits] for the phrase "stuff and nonsense". Doesn't mean we need an article on it. :)) --Stfg (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete: most of the article is dictionary stuff (meaning, usage, etymology). Information about historical events where it was used would be more useful in articles on the events themselves. --Stfg (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
    Keep: the above comment was made after reading a version of the article from which most of the material had been removed. Now it has been restored, it's an obvious keep. --Stfg (talk) 17:57, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep. Very significant slogan historically. However, at the present form, a major part of the article is just a collection of random usages. So, modification in the text is needed. Again, the slogan itself is notable enough to keep the article.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep Without any doubt this is a National Slogan and have historical vlaue as well. Agreed with Dwaipayan need some modifications but slogan itself is notable enough to keep the article.  Tariq.Imran  Talk 18:09, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep The slogan is notable per a number of sources present in the article. The slogan use is described by notable uses in history and the article is limited to the slogan only. I must add here that this article has created many problems first retaliatory article was created, many attempts were made to stop it from appearing it on main page (DYK) and at the end this deletion discussion was started after a fact from it was in the DYK queue. --SMS Talk 21:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Obvious delete, not the object of sourced analytic discussion. The reference doesn't support the statement.Thank You -25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 13:47, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep The slogan is historically notable; however, I believe the bogus sections on Kashmir and India should be quickly removed, otherwise I see this page becoming (if it isn't already) a permanent battleground. Sadly, for Pakistan, the Kashmiris are no longer looking to join them either (as discontented as they might be with India). As for the slogan being raised in India, it is about as likely as the (bogus) slogan "Hindustan Zindabad" being raised in Pakistan. Sure, you could find a two-bit (and two line, tongue-in-cheek,) story from the Indian Express from 1948 about the discovery in a merchant's shop in Moradabad, India, of a handful of brassware engraved with "Pakistan Zindabad." But what does that really mean? The merchant (from Moradabad, a city famous for its brassware) could have been producing it for export across the border to Pakistan. It is hardly an example of the use of the slogan in India. Again, I believe that the historical and contemporary sections are legitimate; the Kashmir and India sections are bogus, and should go. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 05:36, 25 July 2012 (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.