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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 05:20, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kirant Bantawa Ruchhenbung Rai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Utterly devoid of any referencing, written by an account whose sole action was to create this article. All GHITS for the title that I could find are either Wikipedia, Wikipedia mirrors, or other websites using the text here. Either this is original research, or a copyright violation, given the lack of any sources. Nothing worth merging to any article, due to the referencing issues; if this is a valid redirect term, then there are a couple of places it could go. In addition to the above issues, the article is very poorly written, and borders on the nonsensical. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 23:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete amazing what people can write without any credible historical reference. looks like if the page stays will become the firt reference paper on this subject. --Nlfestival (talk) 20:55, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Unsourced, doesn't appear to be any salvageable text here. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 00:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The text is not well written, so it's a little hard to understand. As best I can figure, the article seems to be about several subgroups of the Rai people. The article is unsourced, and possibly original research. As such, it is not suitable for merging. -- Whpq (talk) 10:34, 31 October 2013 (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.