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 04:49, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naf War (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)

Fails WP:RS, whole article is mainly made up on : one source which itself is a self publish blog source. Other sources cited aren't reliable as well. This article was nominated for deletion at first on which the result was delete Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naf War, therefore this is a recreated article for a article itself which was deleted before, which passes WP:G4. Also the article is a pure hoax where Pretty much all the sources fails neutrality. No sources like "BBC news, The Tribune or The Frontline" covered this like 2001 Bangladesh–India border clashes. Additionally to mention, even the top Bangladesh news media did not cover it (prothom alo, dhaka tribune, financial express). Such a hoax article does not need to exist. Imwin567 (talk) 03:31, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Asia, Bangladesh, and Myanmar. Imwin567 (talk) 03:31, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. Shellwood (talk) 16:03, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Delete - nominated it last time to a no consensus closure presumably because people didn't cast !votes. The only reliable sources on these are either routine coverage of a minor skirmish (BBC, Tehran times) or sources directly refuting that this war exists saying it was made up in a talk show one day. The facts of the allegedly reliable sources do not match each other. The dates are inconsistent, the timings reported are inconsistent and it's unclear if General Rahman (from whom the talk show source comes from) was even involved in the actual clash. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 01:13, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, can't find a reliable source that significantly covers this, rather than just briefly mentioning it. And the sources that do significantly cover it are not reliable (such as the self-published "alo" source the article largely relies on). As a result, most of the article consists of pure speculation. Fails WP:V.

Though I don't think it can be speedy deleted under G4, since the last deletion discussion was closed as "soft delete" (basically making it an expired PROD) due to minimal participation. ApexParagon (talk) 23:31, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Been two days and one thing I noticed is there are very participants everytime this article is nominated. I would encourage the admin or whoever will close this discussion to have a better read on the article and sources.

This citation of BBC clearly claimed there was no casualties but the author who created this article used this self blogged article the most as citations which claimed over 600 Burmese troops died. Similarity this article was also used where the article was written by a person back from 2021 (whereas the clash occurred in 2000/2001)..

This jago news article from Bangladesh pretty much states this clash was very minor and did not happen. Also dates do not match with one another. Even if we "assume" this happened, this clash or skirmish did not leave any notable result to be a Wikipedia article.

Nearly all information on the "battle" section is cited with that blog article.. And on the background section, the citations are just major news article which happens along the Bangladesh-Myanmar border.

Also as I mentioned. No major news channel covered this like the Bangladesh-India border clashes or even Operation Clean and Beautiful Nation..Imwin567 (talk) 21:03, 29 March 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.