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.
Merge/redirect to the succession section of her husband. The detail provided suggests that there are sources, but perhaps in Sanskrit, which will not work well with searches in Latin script.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:04, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
What makes you so certain that this isn't a hoax, especially given the deletion of all of the previous similar articles like
Devamala (Shunga dynasty) for the same reason? Also, doesn't retaining unverifiable content essentially violate
WP:V and
WP:NOR, which are policies? Please link us to at least one reliable source which proves that this is a legitimate topic.
Spiderone(Talk to Spider)18:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge/direct as per argument by Peterkingiron. There is ALWAYS an alternative to deletion, but some people on here seem to forget that.
Historyday01 (
talk)
03:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete as hoax. Searched Google Books and Scholar for several variants including Devanagari and
IAST: Dantidurga Shubhaprada / Dantidurga Shubhapradha / Dantidurga Śubhapradā / शुभप्रदा दंतिदुर्ग / शुभप्रदा दन्तिदुर्ग. Repeated this search replacing Dantidurga with Rashtrakuta, Rāṣṭrakūṭa, and राष्ट्रकूट. Zero mentions of this person. Plus, we have reasons to believe that
the creator is a sock of a user banned several times for unsourced additions including hoaxes.
utcursch |
talk20:19, 9 March 2023 (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.
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.
Merge/redirect to the succession section of her husband. The detail provided suggests that there are sources, but perhaps in Sanskrit, which will not work well with searches in Latin script.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:04, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
What makes you so certain that this isn't a hoax, especially given the deletion of all of the previous similar articles like
Devamala (Shunga dynasty) for the same reason? Also, doesn't retaining unverifiable content essentially violate
WP:V and
WP:NOR, which are policies? Please link us to at least one reliable source which proves that this is a legitimate topic.
Spiderone(Talk to Spider)18:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge/direct as per argument by Peterkingiron. There is ALWAYS an alternative to deletion, but some people on here seem to forget that.
Historyday01 (
talk)
03:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete as hoax. Searched Google Books and Scholar for several variants including Devanagari and
IAST: Dantidurga Shubhaprada / Dantidurga Shubhapradha / Dantidurga Śubhapradā / शुभप्रदा दंतिदुर्ग / शुभप्रदा दन्तिदुर्ग. Repeated this search replacing Dantidurga with Rashtrakuta, Rāṣṭrakūṭa, and राष्ट्रकूट. Zero mentions of this person. Plus, we have reasons to believe that
the creator is a sock of a user banned several times for unsourced additions including hoaxes.
utcursch |
talk20:19, 9 March 2023 (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.