Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sino-Kannauj War

Sino-Kannauj War

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

A mere raid that has been vaguely stretched into a War article. RSes do not refer to it as "Sino-Kannauj War", full of WP:HOAX. The article clearly fails to establish WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. HistoryofAryavart (talk) 12:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:@HistoryofAryavart Why there cant be a article? And better check sources and it has a coverage in sources a mere raid doesnt mean it cant have a article and what hoax? whicj info is wrong this Afd seems to based on your POV theres quit ample content for a article title can be changed. Also the theres literally a newsarticle over this in references this suggests that its quit notable.

Edasf«Talk» 12:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC) Edasf «Talk» 12:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing about notability you completely ignored that its even listed at China-India relations article dont think a non notable thing would be listed here. Edasf «Talk» 13:03, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's not how it works. News articles and blogs are not RSes please go through WP:MILNG and WP:RS. I have checked all of the cited sources and non of it explicitly describes "Sino-Kannauj War". The issue of HOAX and GNG still remains unless the article is backed by reliable source that can corroborate to the topic and not some attack or raid. HistoryofAryavart (talk) 13:14, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofAryavart Newsa article isnt only source there and there are also books who are definitely RS by Reliable authors and I have moved page Edasf «Talk» 13:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing to be found about "Sino-Kannauj War" in the sources, quote the sources explicitly mentioning this event. And please do not move the article while the Afd is going on. HistoryofAryavart (talk) 13:23, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heres one Prabhod Chandra Bagchi (2011) "The very same year 647 the Wang Xuance was sent to another imperial mission to Magadha.On his arrival he found that Harsha had died and his minister Arunasva King of Tirabhukti had usurped the throne.The Chinese mission wasnt well recieved its escorts murdered and treasures plundered,Wang Xuance manage to save himself and fled to Nepal which was allied to China through Tibet.There he gathered the milltary support from mercenary Nepali and Tibetan troops and marched on Magadha" Its not full quote theres more but I dont have time you can check the source only.@HistoryofAryavart Edasf «Talk» 13:36, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename There is sufficient coverage for the historical event however the invasion took place purely in the Tirhut/Mithila region of Northern Bihar and Arunasava/Arjuna is described as being the governor or ruler of Tirhut first and foremost hence I believe the article should be renamed to reflect this e.g. the Chinese Invasion of Tirhut.Ixudi (talk) 14:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ixudi I am OK for it Edasf «Talk» 14:24, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well the historians don't even consider the Chinese accounts as reliable or based on historical events but a hoax. For eg see what Majumdar has to say on this event:
- p. 125
  In any case, it is impossible to draw any reliable conclusion from this picture of an invincible hero painted by himself.
- p. 124
  But the Chinese account of the embassy of Wang-hiuen-tse which, as noted above, reached India immediately after the death of Harsha, has preserved some curious details of the history of this period. Accustomed as we are to the exaggeration and self-adulation of the Chinese writers, this account beats all records and reads more like a romance or a string of fables than sober history.
The article is based on a fictional account and the hero (Wang-hiuen-tse) is painted by himself. The issue of WP:HOAX still remains and there's no reason for this article to be kept in article mainspace. HistoryofAryavart (talk) 14:39, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HistoryofAryavart We can still as a article since you gave several more content if it has coverage then we can keep it after some redraw and your source doesn't completely denies its existence. Edasf «Talk» 14:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, the article is purely based on a fabricated account and I have quoted the source to show that it's full of hoaxes, hence Majumdar concludes:
p. 126
On the whole, the story of Wang-hiuen-tse has little historical value, except as a general indication of the anarchy and confusion prevailing in North Biliar and the neighbouring region after the death of Harsha. What happened to the kingdoms of Thaneswar or Kanauj we cannot say, but there is no ground to suppose that Harsha’s death was followed by a political upheaval in the whole of North India.

HistoryofAryavart (talk) 14:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HistoryofAryavart First of all there are other sources as well which do consider it historical and Majumdar is not complete RS since he's no longer a introductory textbooks and his nationalist nature.You need multiple source and Majumdar's interpretations can definitely added in Article but this isn't concrete to delete article. Edasf «Talk» 15:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a case WP:HOAX beacuse the article is based on actual stories. Rather the actual article should be edited to reflect that the events detailed in the stories may not necessarily be historically accurate. Ixudi (talk) 15:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have shown how this Chinese account is not taken seriously. And the event doesn't get enough coverage, much less 5-6 lines of passing mentions which doesn't warrant a standalone article, that said it could have been merged into a parent article. HistoryofAryavart (talk) 15:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What 5-6 line passages? There are 5-6 pages of it in sources and we usually have separate articles for wars and on what grounds you consider it incapable your POV? Edasf «Talk» 15:38, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And Ixudi already told that it has sufficient coverage even a 5-6 line passage is if it has coverage. Edasf «Talk» 15:41, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The quote that you excerpted from the Bagchi (2011) has no more than 6 lines of coverage. HistoryofAryavart (talk) 18:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thats not full quote and coverage matters. Edasf «Talk» 08:48, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm exactly talking about the "full quote" in the source. Garudam ^Talk! 13:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Well I have reviewed the sources itself. The topics outrightly fails SIGCOV and the issue of HOAX remains, this topic should have been rather included in parent pages, say Pushyabhuti dynasty but I don't think it clears the certain criterias to have a standalone article. Garudam ^Talk! 13:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Garudam The HOAX is already cleared by Ixudi stop repeating reasonings and again Wars tend to have separate article it helps clear confusion and correct all your signatures above since you changed name and coverage matter. Edasf «Talk» 15:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military and India.
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and China. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:19, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Lots of back and forth, but very few participants. Additional opinions would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 13:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]