Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Farasa/Parashu

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 Merge to Parashu. However, consensus is also that this title is not correct, and Farasa would be the right alternate term. Therefore, I'm moving this to Farasa and deleting this title to perform the merge. -SpacemanSpiff 01:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Farasa/Parashu

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

Notability not established - should be merged with battle axe. jheiv (talk) 00:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- -SpacemanSpiff 02:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. -- -SpacemanSpiff 02:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete name and merge content: The correct name is Parashu, article exists. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 04:41, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep and address naming and merger considerations as appropriate. A merger doesn't require AfD. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:02, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree that there is no need to go to AFD to discuss mergers and moves, but since we're here... Farasa would be a reasonable redirect to Parashu, which seems to cover the material in this article. This term isn't a likely redirect, so no need to keep it. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 19:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect - make sure the history is retained. LadyofShalott 17:30, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There doesn't seem to be any useful or sourced content in the article to be merged, and it is not a likely search term. The article Parashu can be expanded independently, and redirects from any verifiable alternate transliterations created as and when needed. Abecedare (talk) 03:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, although it does too need a source. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 05:40, 4 January 2010 (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.