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. The historical order may indeed be notable, but the page is primarily about the recent revival, for which no WP:RS have been cited. Deleting under the principle of WP:TNT, with no prejudice against using the title for an article primarily about the historic order. —Darkwind (talk) 07:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Order of the Eagle of Georgia and the Seamless Tunic of Our Lord Jesus Christ[edit]

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

A previous iteration of this article was deleted through AfD last year [1] with the rationale "Non-notable faux order created by members of a self-appointed Royal House of Georgia. Sourced only to that organization's website and to the article creator's blog. No news hits, no Scholar hits, Google search dominated by Wiki mirrors and heraldry blogs. Fails the GNG." While I've no idea if this is a recreation warranting a speedy delete, it has substantively the same problems with sourcing, legitimacy and notability. I've nothing against self-proclaimed "nobles" of a non-existent "kingdom" declaring their right to award a centuries-defunct honor, but it's the moral equivalent of a WP:NFT violation. Ravenswing 22:30, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 22:32, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the content is substantially the same, it can be speedied, otherwise delete as hoax. Suggest salt too. Ansh6 6 6 03:57, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - certainly not a hoax, the order was founded by and is still awarded by the heads of the Royal House of Bagrationi(-Mukhrani) of Georgia. Looking at the official website of the Royal House a recent awarding of the order received coverage in the Spanish and Georgian media.[2] The order is also covered in Burkes Peerage's World Orders of Knighthood and Merit by Guy Stair Sainty.[3] There is probably greater coverage of the order in Georgian rather than in English sources. - dwc lr (talk) 19:06, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Reliable sources must be independent of the subject. We are not permitted to rely upon this "royal house"'s own website's assertion of coverage. Such sources must be provided. You can also not merely assert that independent Georgian sources might exist -- you must supply such sources. Ravenswing 19:50, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The website provides links to independent news articles in Georgia/Spain that one can follow, the use of a self published, in this case official, website does not make it unreliable and they are allowed to be used as sources. It's not ideal to cite the article solely to the website but there are other sources such as the Burke's book. I'm just making the observation that when you say there are "No news hits, no Scholar hits, Google search dominated by Wiki mirrors and heraldry blogs" I'm assuming this is under its English name which is not ideal in establishing notability of a Georgian order. For me based on the above coverage and sources the notability is there without the need for me to do a Georgian language internet search using an online translator. - dwc lr (talk) 20:38, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Such order indeed exists and such article has right to be on Wiki. GEORGIANJORJADZE 08:19, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ymblanter (talk) 07:46, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per CSD:G4. Technical 13 (talk) 16:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —SpacemanSpiff 07:01, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No independent sources or proof doktorb _words^deeds 08:27, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - GeorgianJorjdze's vote is not policy based, and DWC LR doesn't provide any independent reliable sources. There are no other reliable sources that I can find, so we have a failure of WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:54, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No reliable sources. jni (talk) 07:34, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Apparently a recognized [4] chivalric order, reinstated from the time of Queen Tamar. There are other societies that recognize them. The Steve 11:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the order is listed in the World Orders of Knighthood & Merit by Guy Stair Sainty where the long history is listed. --Kimon^talk 18:03, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, in the context of the 12th century order associated with Queen Tamar, rather than the 'revival' by the deposed Bagrationi pretenders. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 05:29, 24 September 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.