This article is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, a project to maintain and expand Afghanistan-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AfghanistanWikipedia:WikiProject AfghanistanTemplate:WikiProject AfghanistanAfghanistan articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Friendly Oppose Starting to look like trolling or dispruption with so many Merge requests in the same day by the same user :) I will need to set up a bot to answer to your merge requests.... So, here we go again: it is a normal process on Wikipedia to create pages on significant rulers. Often they will be expanded and become quite interesting over time. If not, they at least respond to the curiosity of the Wikipedia reader who wants information about this specific ruler. The information is also much easier to find when linking from another page (your xxxxxxx#yyyyyyyyyy types of links get broken over time with the slightest editorial change, they just don't work in the long run, and if you link to the whole master page it's a pain to find the relevant information). The main criteria for existence of a page is Wikipedia:Notability, not the fact that information is limited or could be found or inserted somewhere else. The master page usually is better off summarizing content, while the sub-page can have all the details. Why don't you wait to have a few results from your merge requests to see if your arguments have any weight, before tagging dozens of articles and risk to waste the community's time? Best पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)20:59, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This Khingala is unknown except from the Gardez Ganesha Inscription and a bunch of hypothesis about his identity by Kuwayama. Each and every HISTRS states the same: one Khingala is mentioned in the Garden Ganesha and Kuwayama proposes him to be [...]
It is neither an uncontested fact that Khingala is known in name from the accounts of the Muslim historian Ya'qubi nor that Khingala was a ruler of the Turk Shahis nor that these "transliterations" (if at all) referred to the same king nor that .....
You keep on doing weird acrobatics trying to create article about every damn ruler mentioned in scholarship on C. Asia and eventually do away with the nuances [though some of it is visible in body]. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:13, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
