This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Korea. It is one of many
deletion lists coordinated by
WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Korea|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Korea. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's
deletion policy and
WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to
Asia.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Delete Redirect per
Cocobb8. Cannot find any sources on GBooks, Google (except for WP mirror content), Archive.org, or anywhere else that turns up any result at all for any of the romanization options given or Hangul/Hanja script provided. I doubt it's a
WP:HOAX, but I think we can safely delete redirect if no sources to validate notability can be found 20 years since this article was created.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 16:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong Keep. I removed the PROD after finding plenty of sources on this individual especially in Korean. This is most likely due to the various different spellings of his name. Here in this Korean translation of the Goryeosa[1] published by the National Institute of Korean History he is listed as both "독타불화" and "톡타부카". Individual has Encyclopedia of Korean Culture article
[2] as well as a Doosan Encyclopedia article
[3] both listed as "왕독타불화". He also appears in
Empire's Twilight: Northeast Asia under the Mongols by David M. Robinson as "Toqto'a-Buqa" as well as in Korea and the Fall of the Mongol Empire also by Robinson.
⁂CountHacker (
talk) 17:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)reply
CountHacker (
talk·contribs), the link for the "Doosan Encyclopedia article" is malformed. Would you fix the link? Thank you.
Cunard (
talk) 11:04, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: The sources found by
CountHacker are mostly simple passing mentions and do not help in establishing
WP:NBIO.
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 15:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Cocobb8, there are two Korean-language encyclopedia articles on this individual. That is not a passing mention. Not only that, he held the the office of Prince/King of Sim/Shen (various ways to translate it), which was a major office in Goryeo-Yuan politics, and had authority over the Koreans who lived in the Yuan-controlled Liaodong area. There were various attempts to place Wang Toqto'a-Buqa on the throne of Goryeo, he wasn't just a random noble prince, but an influential prince with power and influence, who nearly became king in at least two attempts.
⁂CountHacker (
talk) 16:41, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
CountHacker, encyclopedic articles are
tertiary sources, so they cannot be used demonstrate notability, as GNG clearly states that sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. Also, kinds and princes are not inherently notable and must demonstrate their own notability per
WP:NBIO. Cheers,
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 17:36, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per sources presented above. Other encyclopedias having an entry is a good sign we should as well.
PARAKANYAA (
talk) 14:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting, opinion divided between Redirect and Keep Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 06:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Obvious keep, clearly passes GNG per CountHacker's sources, and the two encyclopedia's entries alone are more than enough to establish notability. The redirect comments should be disregarded, the first one (we can safely delete redirect if no sources to validate notability can be found) is pure nonsense: it would had made sense as long as sources had not been provided, but
changing the delete vote to redirect after sourcing has been provided just leaves a contradictory and illogical rationale. The second one, claiming that individual entries on established encyclopedias such as Encyclopedia of Korean Culture and Doosan Encyclopedia do not count towards notability, is just a
WP:CIR issue and a
WP:COMMONSENSE failure. --
Cavarrone 08:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Korea. It is one of many
deletion lists coordinated by
WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Korea|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Korea. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's
deletion policy and
WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to
Asia.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Delete Redirect per
Cocobb8. Cannot find any sources on GBooks, Google (except for WP mirror content), Archive.org, or anywhere else that turns up any result at all for any of the romanization options given or Hangul/Hanja script provided. I doubt it's a
WP:HOAX, but I think we can safely delete redirect if no sources to validate notability can be found 20 years since this article was created.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 16:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong Keep. I removed the PROD after finding plenty of sources on this individual especially in Korean. This is most likely due to the various different spellings of his name. Here in this Korean translation of the Goryeosa[1] published by the National Institute of Korean History he is listed as both "독타불화" and "톡타부카". Individual has Encyclopedia of Korean Culture article
[2] as well as a Doosan Encyclopedia article
[3] both listed as "왕독타불화". He also appears in
Empire's Twilight: Northeast Asia under the Mongols by David M. Robinson as "Toqto'a-Buqa" as well as in Korea and the Fall of the Mongol Empire also by Robinson.
⁂CountHacker (
talk) 17:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)reply
CountHacker (
talk·contribs), the link for the "Doosan Encyclopedia article" is malformed. Would you fix the link? Thank you.
Cunard (
talk) 11:04, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: The sources found by
CountHacker are mostly simple passing mentions and do not help in establishing
WP:NBIO.
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 15:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Cocobb8, there are two Korean-language encyclopedia articles on this individual. That is not a passing mention. Not only that, he held the the office of Prince/King of Sim/Shen (various ways to translate it), which was a major office in Goryeo-Yuan politics, and had authority over the Koreans who lived in the Yuan-controlled Liaodong area. There were various attempts to place Wang Toqto'a-Buqa on the throne of Goryeo, he wasn't just a random noble prince, but an influential prince with power and influence, who nearly became king in at least two attempts.
⁂CountHacker (
talk) 16:41, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
CountHacker, encyclopedic articles are
tertiary sources, so they cannot be used demonstrate notability, as GNG clearly states that sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. Also, kinds and princes are not inherently notable and must demonstrate their own notability per
WP:NBIO. Cheers,
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 17:36, 19 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per sources presented above. Other encyclopedias having an entry is a good sign we should as well.
PARAKANYAA (
talk) 14:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting, opinion divided between Redirect and Keep Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 06:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Obvious keep, clearly passes GNG per CountHacker's sources, and the two encyclopedia's entries alone are more than enough to establish notability. The redirect comments should be disregarded, the first one (we can safely delete redirect if no sources to validate notability can be found) is pure nonsense: it would had made sense as long as sources had not been provided, but
changing the delete vote to redirect after sourcing has been provided just leaves a contradictory and illogical rationale. The second one, claiming that individual entries on established encyclopedias such as Encyclopedia of Korean Culture and Doosan Encyclopedia do not count towards notability, is just a
WP:CIR issue and a
WP:COMMONSENSE failure. --
Cavarrone 08:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply