Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maxamuud Xoosh Cigaal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Heesxiisoleh (talk | contribs) at 16:00, 28 January 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Maxamuud Xoosh Cigaal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:1E + Article does not meet GNG, BASIC, ANYBIO or NSOLDIER. Source in the article and BEFORE did not show anything with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and in depth.  // Timothy :: talk  06:59, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Somalia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Search does not bring anything that gives GNG. --Whiteguru (talk) 10:29, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete being subjectively the "last" person captured in a fort does not in any way make someone notable. The page tries to claim much bigger impact and importance than really exists.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, I have added two more sources to the page. The sources describe him as a leading anti-colonial figure as well as one of the main native African sources regarding tactics both by the Europeans as well as the counter-tactics used by Africans. Heesxiisoleh (talk) 14:26, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge/redirect to Taleh#Dervish_forts -- all the sources seem to discuss him in that context and I am not seeing an independent pass of GNG. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:48, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Please check the sources that are being added against the information that is being added to the article. They are not SIGCOV, they do not support the material being added to the article. They are simply being added to puff up the article, not because they have anything to do with the subject.  // Timothy :: talk  14:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Just because a Latinized name is spelled different from its native name doesn't mean the two characters suddenly become different people. Heesxiisoleh (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • Some of the sources you are adding are about individuals other than the subject. But directly, how does this reference and this reference support any of the content you have added?  // Timothy :: talk  15:14, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
          • The "Africa in Soviet Studies" source discusses a "false letter". This letter they're speaking about discusses a letter which Xoosh claims was forged by the British to be derived from a man named Salah, a revered individual who the British knew was influential enough to cause a rift within the anti-colonial camp. According to the claim of Xoosh or Hosh, the original letter contained no damnation of the anti-colonial struggle, whilst the forged letter did. (if you are interested in the Salah letter, this page gives some insight [1]). As for the "Diwaanka" source, you most sources have snippets, but this link gives you most of the content (here). If you try word-find the term "Xoosh" on that page, you frequently see "waxaan ka qoray" before the name of Xoosh. The term "waxaan ka qoray" literally translates to "this was derived from" or "this was written from". On the extended Diiwaanka version you see even more such examples. In each of these examples entire chapters of colonial and pre-colonial history is singularly derived from this man. The entire chapter you see on these pages come from this man as a source. Heesxiisoleh (talk) 15:33, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]