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. plicit 12:27, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kyrgyz art (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is completely unverifiable and likely written by a large language model. The text consists mostly of vague generalities and there are no inline citations. The four general references given are bogus, as far as I can tell: the two books don't appear to exist, the two links are broken. Kyrgyz art is certainly a notable topic, but this version of the article doesn't contain anything worth retaining. – Joe (talk) 07:07, 28 September 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.