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. Bishonen | talk 23:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Jatland (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It is not a real area, it is created by a sock, where the goal is only promotion using the Wikipedia. Meeanaya ( talk) 08:10, 7 July 2019 (UTC) reply

• Comment although it isn’t an actual administrative unit, the refs provided in the article show that it is a term in current use and widely understood. We have an article for Khalistan movement but not one for Khalistan so perhaps this article should be renamed Jatland movement? Mccapra ( talk) 08:25, 7 July 2019 (UTC) reply

@ Mccapra: I dont know if such a movement is going on, but if it is, then it would have to be notable to get an article. —usernamekiran (talk) 09:15, 17 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Mccapra, Although it is popular term used by the politicians to draw attention and there is nothing significant. Another example can be Hinduland or Muslimland. The page was created by a Sock with a very clear purpose to seek advantages for term Jatland. Meeanaya ( talk) 09:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Meeanaya I think Hinduland and Muslimland are differ from Jatland. -- Ashok Talk 17:19, 7 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Meeanaya I understand the point you're making but I believe that our policies on Wikipedia mean that even if this 'isn't really a thing' and is just an idea some people are talking up for partisan purposes, if it has been covered extensively in the press it is likely to be notable, regardless of who originally created the article and whatever their purpose was. The refs provided in the article look sound to me. If there are literally no other references to Jatland then this may be a borderline case, but if there are other pieces in the mainstream press also discussing the idea, it probably is notable enough to have its own article. Thanks. Mccapra ( talk) 20:18, 7 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Mccapra I agree that a page can be created as a term but not as an area, which really don't exists. It will be better to draftify first and rewrite to display the appropriate content on the page. Meeanaya ( talk) 04:11, 8 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 11:49, 7 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz ( talk) 12:43, 7 July 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep - Jatland word is popular among the people of Indian states Rajasthan, Haryana, Delhi and Punjab. Its quit popular in Pakistan also. -- Ashok Talk 17:15, 7 July 2019 (UTC) reply

AshokChakra- I complete agree, it is popular term so it could have a page not as an area but as a term, why it exists and what it is for. Meeanaya ( talk) 04:13, 8 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Dear Meeanaya, Jatland is a term for geographical area. An area where majority of Jats are live. Maybe it is not in the map of India but in the states it is a notable area. -- Ashok Talk 16:15, 8 July 2019 (UTC) reply

AshokChakra- Good to know about it, Can I create pages for Bheelland, Punjabiland, Banialand, Rajputland and others similar to the lines of Jatland which is a hypothetical term? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meeanaya ( talk • contribs)

Meeanaya, I think whatever you want to create, not notable. I mean Jatland article provides references, all reliable. But its up to you, what do you want to create or not. ;) -- Ashok Talk 16:28, 9 July 2019 (UTC) reply

It is a pseudological term used to define an area or region which does not exists, if this is accepted there can be several pages on the same lines, really we need to draw a line to avoid spam. Meeanaya ( talk) 10:53, 10 July 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep. None of the nominator’s arguments seem compelling to me. Mccapra ( talk) 05:01, 14 July 2019 (UTC) reply
  • The Wikipedia:no original research policy should. Same challenge to you, too: What do sources actually document about this subject? And how is the article at hand not a bizarre synthesis from nonce-word newspaper headlinese that somehow has this subject stretching across vast and unconnected parts of India? Start off with an easy one if you like: How is the first sentence of the article supported by the BSI piece at all? Please put content policy into action. Uncle G ( talk) 08:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC) reply
    • OK I understand the point that the article defines an area as being known casually as 'Jatland' while none of the sources for the article offer any such definition, just referring to it as if its meaning is already understood. In terms of sourcing for a geographical definition, I've so far found:
• Christophe Jaffrelot (2010). Religion, Caste, and Politics in India. Primus Books. p.35 ISBN 978-93-80607-04-7

  and

  Jat Politics At Crossroads Following Election Results Mccapra ( talk) 17:03, 17 July 2019 (UTC) reply

  • Neither actually contain a single fact about a Jatland. The second is actually about the 2019 Indian general election results across various states, and the first is a footnote about the post-Partition manoeuvrings (which were a little more complex than that, in truth, given what happened in 1966). Uncle G ( talk) 05:13, 23 July 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep WP:GEOLAND applies. FOARP ( talk) 11:59, 15 July 2019 (UTC) reply
  • How? What do the sources tell us about this subject? Uncle G ( talk) 22:38, 15 July 2019 (UTC) reply
    • It's an informal name for a region (similar to e.g., Tri-state area), WP:Geoland allows that these be kept on a case-by-case basis if supported and notable under WP:GNG. This is supported by reliable sources (e.g., 1 2 3 ). FOARP ( talk) 07:13, 16 July 2019 (UTC) reply
      • None of the three sources that you point to state that. One is all about stereotypes of Haryana, one is about a politician visiting Bagpat district, and one is about BJP politicians in the Jind district. None of the three actually contain a single fact about a Jatland. You aren't actually putting the Primary Notability Criterion into practice at all. You are phrase-matching headlines and sub-heads, some of which are even signalling that this is a nonce term by putting it in quotation marks. Putting the PNC into practice involves evaluating the depths of sources, which involves finding out what they actually tell one about a subject. So I challenge you again: What do sources actually tell one about this subject? Uncle G ( talk) 08:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep The article meets the WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG criteria. It is reported by reliable sources. -- Harshil169 ( talk) 08:13, 16 July 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Same challenge: What sources? And what do they tell us? Have you read them? Uncle G ( talk) 08:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC) reply
• delete: ​ first of all, WP:GEOLAND is not applicable here as the name is not given/created/labelled by census authority or any other government body. secondly: Elected or other politicians use it for politicial/divisive reasons, in that case it doesnt pass it WP:GNG; as most of the times the term is used in either steriotypical manner (talking about Jat community), or in some sort derogatory and/or crude manner (or humour). These sources do not meet criteria for reliable sources. The only two reliable sources that "mentioned" the term, was because they quoted the same peron who had used the term. It is as trivial as it can get.Thirdly: Other such terms which are used, like Tristate area, or some "golden triangle" for industries, or toursim; are used by government officially. eg: "the crime rate in tristate area has increased, so we are increasing our efforts to stop it". That was a statement from few years back from the government. Other statements by government can be found like "offering schemes in x-y-z golden triangle to boost industries" or "tourism". There are also numerous articles about those areas. These articles discuss the subject in depth. Like "what constitutes as tristate, the brief history of tristate, how was the crime in past, the current crime situation, possible reasons/speculations of the increase, government's response to the increase" and so on. The point is, all of these areas receive significant coverage that too persistently. Whereas Jatland hasnt been covered by any WP:RS in depth. Government doesnt use it officially. It fails WP:GNG, and as explained in first point, it fails WP:GEOLAND. Its a nickname. It exists. But its not notable. —usernamekiran (talk) 09:13, 17 July 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete as WP:NOTDIC. A simple and self-explanatory portmanteau of Jat and -land that headline-writers sometimes find catchy, the subject itself fails WP:GEOLAND (as it represents no legally recognized or even disputed geographic entity) and WP:GNG (no significant coverage by reliable sources of either the term or what it represents). And unlike, say, Khalistan, proposals for forming an actual Jatland are essentially throwaway calls and are best covered as a single sentence at Shiromani Akali Dal (Amritsar) if found to be due even there. At close of AFD, the page can be redirected to Jat people. Abecedare ( talk) 16:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC) reply
• Comment – I agree with the concise and precise explanation of Abecedare. I guess keep !voters are confusing popularity with notability. The term is regularly & casually used by Indian media. And its meaning can only be understood in the context of the article. It may mean an area dominated by Jats numerically, politically, or culturally. And as such there is no definition of Jatland. I must also mention here that, leaving behind the relevant government notifications, we require academic sources for South Asian religion/caste/ethnicity-related claims on this project, as media standards are extremely poor here. As far as academic sources are concerned, they hardly ever use this term. I could find only a single quality source which comes anywhere close to defining Jatland. Here is the relevant quote: ^[1]

As the table below shows, while the country’s foodgrain production has nearly doubled since 1970–1, it has trebled in the case of Punjab and Haryana. If we were to also include the Hindu Jats of western Uttar Pradesh (UP) and their Sikh counterparts who have ‘colonized’ the irrigated tracts of northern Rajasthan (mainly Ganganagar and Hanumangarh) and the Tarai area of Uttarakhand, the result is a geographically contiguous, extended ‘Jatland’ territory. It is this belt that has been the cradle of India’s Green Revolution.

In short, the term is neither well-defined in any quality source nor it meets the WP:GNG (as it is always mentioned in passing).So, we are left with WP:ATD. If someone can provide reliable sources which define the term properly, then we can merge/redirect it somewhere, let's say, Jat people. Otherwise we should delete it. - NitinMlk ( talk) 22:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep per WP:GEOLAND This sbbject meet our GNG with WP:RS. I am not an expert on India however I relied on the descriptions put forth - the subject appears to be sometimes described as a village, and or a region. India Times, Open The Magazine, Travel Triangle, and DNA India. Lightburst ( talk) 16:59, 21 July 2019 (UTC) reply

@ Lightburst: Since you point to WP:GNG, can you spell out how how this blog qualifies as a reliable source and how that or the other sources you list list contain "significant coverage" on the subject? To avoid confusion, I'll note that significant coverage means that the source "addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content". If after reading those sources, you are not even sure if the term refers to "a village, and or a region", wouldn't that indicate that those sources are not fit to write an encyclopedic entry on the subject? Abecedare ( talk) 17:14, 21 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Abecedare I determine from the sources that it exists. I think you can ignore the blog that you have dismissed and consider the rest, including the non-english press. Using various criteria I see that it is a place. India is a complicated geographical location with a mix of regions, villages, and areas often described by locals and others in contradictory descriptives. I will continue to search as I always do. Lightburst ( talk) 17:22, 21 July 2019 (UTC) reply

@ Lightburst: Mere existence is not what is required by GNG, which you cited. And GEOLAND, which you also cited, simply does not apply. 'Jat land' exists as a concept, not a specific geographical region. Please read the posts above by Usernamekiran and NitinMlk, who are very much familiar with the geography and complications of India, to understand what the subject and discussion are about. I'll particularly point you to the latter's accurate (albeit WP:OR) definition, And its meaning can only be understood in the context of the article. It may mean an area dominated by Jats numerically, politically, or culturally. That will help explain how the articles you cited don't even use the term to refer to the same concept. Times of India uses Jatland as a synonym for Haryana; Open magazine uses it to talk about Jat migrant community in Chhattisgarh; while DNA India uses it to highlight Jat electoral prowess in Delhi. Abecedare ( talk) 17:37, 21 July 2019 (UTC) reply

India Census 2011 describes an area as simply Jat, and the specific term Jatland is not used in the 2011 census. From one source provided it looked as if there were protests regarding the creation of Jatland. Not sure we dismiss ignore the one about creation of Jatland. Lightburst ( talk) 17:46, 21 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Jat, Sangli in Maharashtra is not remotely related, in any sense, to Jat people or Jatland; the names do not even derive from the same family of same languages. And this article is not talking about "creation of Jatland." Interpreting its mention of "convert it into 'Jat land' on March 20" as such, is akin to interpreting "Democrats plan to turn Texas blue in 2024" to a desire to spray-paint the state. :)

May I suggest that you withdraw your !vote at this afd and we hat the following discussion since its going increasing off-topic and bordering on WP:CIR/ WP:IDHT? Abecedare ( talk) 18:09, 21 July 2019 (UTC) reply

@ Lightburst: Like Abecedare said: Jat, Sangli is a completely different town. It has nothing to do with the Jat community. The town belongs in state of Maharashtra, and such is a marathi language name. No relation to Jat community, or Jatland at all. The "creation of Jatland" article you provided uses the term metaphorically. Like some clowns saying, "we will host a show in delhi on March 20, and convert it into merryland". Kindly read my vote above. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2019 (UTC) reply

• Delete: From further research and examination of the references, this subject does not pass GNG. Jatland is not an actual region or village and the 2011 census has confined this. WP:GEOLAND is not met. I am unsure what Jatland refers to at this point but it seems plausible to assume that Abecedare may be correct in stating it is like saying, "Democrats plan to turn Texas blue in 2024". I cannot even find that Jatland fits a descriptive area like the Southern United States. Lightburst ( talk) 01:41, 22 July 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep per WP:GEOLAND. Although this is not a legal entity, there is non-trivial coverage in multiple independent reliable sources (Business Standard, News18, Hindustan Times etc.) which makes it notable. While it does appear to be just an idea, it is one that has received significant coverage and so passes notability guidelines. It's essentially an unofficial region with citations to support its existence. Highway 89 ( talk) 01:43, 23 July 2019 (UTC) reply
  • @ Highway 89: Hi. Could you provide links to the reliable sources that covers the subject significantly, rather than just naming them? —usernamekiran (talk) 03:18, 23 July 2019 (UTC) reply
  • None so far, do. There's actually no coverage at all in any of the sources cited, because they do not contain a single fact about this purported concept, not even support for the first sentence of the article at hand. I have been pointing out what they actually document. Have you read them? Uncle G ( talk) 05:13, 23 July 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Revising to delete. Upon further reading of the sources, the coverage appears to be purely speculative with no real facts of note. Highway 89 ( talk) 15:39, 23 July 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Abecedare's cogent portmanteau explanation and usernamekiran's GEOLAND explanation. I also note that the the sources, such as they are, variously use "Jat land" or "Jat-land", strengthening the portmanteau argument and signifying that this is not a standard term. -- regentspark ( comment) 22:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete, exactly as RegentsPark explains, including their own referencing of Abecedare and usernamekiran. It is a nebulous concept deployed by lazy journalists. At best, this would be a WP:DICDEF thing. - Sitush ( talk) 06:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete changing my !vote after further thought. The sources I found are too sparse and the arguments of Sitush and Abecedare are persuasive. Mccapra ( talk) 09:30, 28 July 2019 (UTC) reply

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.