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 00:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mughal conquest of Mewar (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)

There's no such conquest to begin with, sources itself states that it was a peace treaty. Not like there's enough coverage to have this article on mainspace. Totally written in WP:FANPOV. Koshuri ^(グ) 14:32, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, India, and Rajasthan. Koshuri ^(グ) 14:32, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 February 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Not sure if this is a troll. The event is one of the major campaigns of Mughals during thier growth period, where they vassalized one of the strongholds in Indian history. This is one of the most popular era in Indian history, between the Rajputs and the Mughals (the notability criteria is not even a question here). And "Suing for peace" is not considered as peace treaty (as if like WW1 ended in peace treary).--Imperial^[AFCND] 15:42, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  What do you mean by troll? please refrain from passing WP:PA. "The event is one of the major campaigns of Mughals during thier growth period, where they vassalized one of the strongholds in Indian history. This is one of the most popular era in Indian history, between the Rajputs and the Mughals (the notability criteria is not even a question here).": because you say so? Mewar was independent as a whole or indirectly throughout the Indian history. I don't know what you mean through these above blatant original research. Please also avoid WP:OCON, we are in no way talking about World War I. Koshuri ^(グ) 16:05, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Suing for peace is not the same as Peace treaty. We even got sources for the surrender of Amar Singh I. About the notability, the fall of the Mewar to the Mughals are pretty notable, not because I say so. Almost every book passing through the history of Shah Jahan covers this event, as one of his greatest achievements as a Prince. The sources present in the article have in-depth coverage on it. I just don't want to list a whole here. Imperial^[AFCND] 19:42, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Do you even know what "conquest" means, as the title is chosen by you (the initial contributor)? Per Oxford dictionary: the act of taking control of a country, city, etc. by force. The article shouldn't be in mainspace, simply because it's written in a fan pov at best, let this event reside in Amar Singh I or somewhere else. Koshuri ^(グ) 14:23, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: POV fan cruft and content fork already thoroughly covered at Kingdom of Mewar and Amar Singh I. Fails WP:GNG, sources do not treat it as a notable topic. - Ratnahastin (talk) 15:46, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Article seems POV push conquest is not an appropriate term but vassalisation for which separate article is not needed. Like Shah Jahan also had vassalised various southern sultanates but not shown in timeline maps as a part of the empire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:201:A404:2997:E825:FEB6:AA07:B746 (talk) 19:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This article is heavily biased and fails to meet WP:NPOV, with a misleading title and reliance on unsourced assertions failing WP:SRC and excessive "page needed" tags compromise its WP:V. NXcrypto Message 10:06, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: As per nomination. There's nothing this article states that hasn't already been covered by another article. AlvaKedak (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2025 (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.