Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 42: Line 42:
== India ==
== India ==
<!--New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
<!--New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Noizbloc_(2nd_nomination)}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gopal Snacks}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gopal Snacks}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sindhuja Rajaraman}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sindhuja Rajaraman}}

Revision as of 13:10, 15 March 2024

Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to India. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|India|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to India. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Asia.

Purge page cache watch

India

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. Star Mississippi 02:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noizbloc

AfDs for this article:
Noizbloc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable record label. Fails to meet WP:NCORP or WP:GNG. I could not find any sources on Google, and nothing has changed since the last AfD. – DreamRimmer (talk) 09:43, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete (or possibly speedy) again no sign of notability of any flavour, just like at the previous AfD. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I also thought about applying CSD A7, but I wondered if it had already been rejected for speedy deletion before, which might be why it was nominated for AfD. So, I concluded that AfD would be the best course of action. – DreamRimmer (talk) 11:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – Unable to find anything else usable online. Here is an analysis of what we have right now.
Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://www.thecompanycheck.com/company/noizbloc-private-limited/U59201TN2023PTC165258 No Provided by company. Yes I suppose it's just factual data? No ✘ No
https://www.planetexim.net/indian-company/noizbloc-private-limited/cin/U59201TN2023PTC165258.html No Yes No ✘ No
https://aeroleads.com/list/top-music-label-companies-in-india No No ~ ✘ No
https://fox40.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/689077362/breaking-boundaries-kadhal-kadamaye-emerges-as-a-musical-masterpiece/ No Press release. No ✘ No
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001wppt Yes Yes No ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
TLAtlak 12:38, 15 March 2024 (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.
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. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gopal Snacks

Gopal Snacks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for corporations, as explained in WP:NCORP and WP:ORGCRIT. WP:PROMO. Charlie (talk) 07:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:11, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. In plain English, this means that references cannot rely *only* on information provided by the company - such as what seems to be the case here where most of the references are cut-and-paste jobs from the company's IPO prospectus and the rest is mere commentary on their stock market performance with no in-depth "Independent Content" *about the company*. Perhaps in the future some analysts might publish something as suggested above, but I cannot locate anything on this company that meets GNG/NCORP. HighKing++ 18:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Highking lacks in depth coverage fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:45, 29 March 2024 (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.
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 keep‎. There was some debate over the question whether becoming a CEO at the age of 14 is an event. Regardless, the achievement received a sufficient amount of significant coverage in mainstream, national news outlets over several years so as not to fail the third prong of BLP1E, as the Keep views correctly argued. I see no basis in policy that coverage has to be international, and don't find WP:NOTWEBHOST to be relevant here. Owen× ☎ 00:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sindhuja Rajaraman

Sindhuja Rajaraman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable WP:1E, WP:NOTWEBHOST Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 04:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:13, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: Sources 3 and 10 are in RS, not an overwhelming keep, but we have enough confirmation of her notability. A Guinness record isn't notable. Oaktree b (talk) 19:35, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Both the sources are are more like an interview with the topic and doesn't seem independent. Bhivuti45 (talk) 21:34, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - as I checked, the sources are either dead or churnalism and sponsored posts. Bhivuti45 (talk) 21:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep – I feel that WP:BLP1E shouldn't apply all that well to age. Especially because we have sources starting from 2011 and spanning to 2019. I agree that there is likely churnalism for some of the sources here, but there is at least 3 generally reliable sources that can be used. Part of the sources do contain interviews, but some either do commentate or introduce the subject before the interview, which constitutes just enough WP:INDEPENDENT for me. TLAtlak 10:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Achievement is that she is the youngest CEO and that is all we know from one or two reliable sources and this was news in 2011. I do not see sources where the coverage was an international recognition. I did not find articles where her achievements were highly notable. Simple search now also takes you back to Indian news media links from 2011, 2013 and one from 2016 by hindu.com. I do not find her notable because there are many other young CEOs who are and can be considered notable because they were listed in Fortune 500 magazine but Sindhuja made into no such list. Maybe a page like List of youngest CEOs where I could have decided to redirect or merge to but I did not find any such page here. RangersRus (talk) 13:41, 5 April 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. While the Keep arguments were weak, we do not delete a page based on one contested !vote. Owen× ☎ 00:39, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strawberry Fields (Indian festival)

Strawberry Fields (Indian festival) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable, no WP:INDEPTH SIGCOV. WP:ROUTINE coverage Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 03:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, India, and Karnataka. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 03:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, several dozen hits on ProQuest, but I'm having difficulty finding coverage that is secondary and in-depth. Still, the festival has been around for over 25 years, so it seems likely there are good sources in music magazines and the like that I've missed. Mach61 06:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As said in nom, no WP:INDEPTH SIGCOV. WP:ROUTINE coverage as mandated in all criterias of WP:NEVENT. There are various subjects with the very same name, so not sure about the results you got. @Mach61 Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 10:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @User4edits My argument is that even insignificant coverage over a long time period is enough to show that the festival is of some repute, and since it has been around for a few decades, it is likely that sources I have not or cannot find have covered it in depth; for example, in an offline source that I could only read if I went to a library in India. Notability is not based on if sources are currently cited, it is based on if sources exist.

    Of course, the presumption of coverage only goes so far. If the Festival got very few hits online, I would have no reason to assume it was prominent enough to receive offline coverage, and if it was founded more recently, I would assume that almost all sources discussing it would be online. But neither of those things are true in this case. Mach61 11:28, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - the article is collaborative and well-referenced, and reports a significant regional cultural event; the large number of relevant and pertinent wikilinks to notable bands and performers demonstrates the significance of the festival in related articles.Timothy Titus Talk To TT 15:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    significant regional cultural event [according to whom?] wikilinks to notable bands and performers[relevant?] [weasel words]. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 10:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Trying one more relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:37, 29 March 2024 (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.
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 redirect‎ to National Law School of India University. Star Mississippi 13:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Journal of Law and Technology

Indian Journal of Law and Technology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable per WP:NJOURNAL Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 03:10, 15 March 2024 (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.
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 redirect‎ to National Law School of India University. Star Mississippi 13:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Law School of India Review

National Law School of India Review (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable per WP:NJOURNAL Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 03:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals, Law, and India. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 03:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to National Law School of India University, its publishing institution. There's no real claim of notability here. That the "journal has been cited in various publications" and "the only student-run journal to be cited by the Supreme Court of India" are misleading; it is not the journal that is being cited, but the article published in the journal. This might suggest notability of the authors whose work is cited, but not the publication where the articles were published. Further, in that respect, "student-run" is irrelevant, since it is the author that is being cited, the fact that he or she published in a student-run journal has no bearing on its notability.
It's worth a paragraph in the law school's article, but lacks notability for a free-standing article. TJRC (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2024 (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.
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. If an editor wants to work on this article in Draft space, let me know or make a request at WP:REFUND. Liz Read! Talk! 07:28, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anannyaa Akulaa

Anannyaa Akulaa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR (one sort of lead role with five others and one supporting role). Notability not established. All sources are passing mentions. The greatandhra source about Ajastos sounds like an ad and is unreliable: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Guidelines on sources.

Best to redirect to Hostel Days. Also, WP:TOO EARLY. DareshMohan (talk) 21:06, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • As the original creator of the article, I would like to recommend Strong Keep, as I believe this new age of actors and upcoming film makers would become more and more relevanth with digital age and media, hence if the concensus reaches delete, i would rather have it drafted than merged to any other article. bɑʁɑqoxodaraP (talk) 06:01, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a divergence of opinion. If his was Redirected, what would the target article be? Thanks.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:30, 21 March 2024 (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.
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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 02:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Bahraich (1034)

Battle of Bahraich (1034) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article depicts a legendary tale involving two figures, devoid of any historical basis. It fails WP:GNG, and there are no reliable sources referring to it as the "Battle of Bahraich." The title is a fabricated name, and reputable sources do not classify it as a battle. Instead, numerous sources, including the parent article, refer to both figures as part of a legend. Failure to meet GNG criteria and its lack of connection to actual historical events, it is worth noting that no historian identifies it as the "Battle of Bahraich." Imperial[AFCND] 13:37, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep
I appreciate the concerns raised regarding the historical authenticity of the "Battle of Bahraich (1034)" article. However, I would like to provide some additional context before a decision is made.
While I understand that some sources may classify the events described in the article as a legend or myth, it's essential to recognize the cultural significance of such tales. The story of the Battle of Bahraich holds deep cultural and historical value for many communities, even if it may not align with traditional academic standards of historical evidence.
Rather than outright deletion, I suggest considering alternative approaches to the article. Perhaps it could be revised to include a section discussing the legendary aspects of the story, while also acknowledging its cultural importance. Additionally, efforts could be made to find scholarly perspectives that analyze the narrative from a cultural or folklore studies lens.
In conclusion, I believe that outright deletion may overlook the broader cultural and historical context surrounding the "Battle of Bahraich (1034)". I encourage us to explore alternative solutions that respect the cultural significance of the story while also upholding Wikipedia's standards of verifiability and neutrality.
Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely, Sudsahab (talk) 13:34, 19 March 2024 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Sudsahab (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]
I don't understand how this argument makes a point to oppose the deletion. Myths cannot be mixed with history. And most importantly, it is not accepted to invent names for military conflicts, whether it is real, or mythological. I apologize if I'm mistaken, but your comment appears to resemble an AI-generated essay rather than a genuine argument.Imperial[AFCND] 14:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding myths and history, Wikipedia's policy on verifiability WP:V states that all information must be based on reliable, published sources. However, the policy also acknowledges that myths and legends can be significant aspects of cultural narratives surrounding historical events. Therefore, if there are reliable sources discussing the mythological aspects of the Battle of Bahraich and their cultural significance, they can be included in the article with appropriate context and attribution, as outlined in the reliable sources guideline WP:RS.Wikipedia's naming conventions for events WP:EVENTN recommend using the most common name for the event as determined by reliable sources. If there is a commonly accepted name for the Battle of Bahraich in reliable sources, it should be used in the article. However, if no such name exists, a descriptive title that accurately reflects the nature of the conflict can be used, in accordance with the policy on article titles WP:AT. I want to clarify that the sources I have added to the article support and verify the title "Battle of Bahraich." Each citation I have included discusses this specific event, providing historical context and supporting the use of this title. Therefore, it is not an invented name but rather one supported by reliable sources. Sudsahab (talk) 14:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again an AI generated essay with no point of valid arguement. Imperial[AFCND] 14:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not an AI generated arguement Sudsahab (talk) 04:51, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:36, 21 March 2024 (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.
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 keep‎. Nomination has been withdrawn, sources added to the article. Liz Read! Talk! 23:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poo Vaasam

Poo Vaasam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The film is obscure, undersourced and fails WP:NFILM. In fact the producer's son said, "even I don’t remember much of that film". Kailash29792 (talk) 04:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, nominator has withdrawn their nomination but there are still a variety of arguments over what should happen with this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:59, 21 March 2024 (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.
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. ✗plicit 06:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karthik Naralasetty

AfDs for this article:
Karthik Naralasetty (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Karthik Naralasetty has some sources on his life and company, a 30 under 30 article and some promotional content, he won an award 13 years ago, I don't think it provides SIGCOV or establishes GNG.

I was going to PROD this article until I found that it not only has been PROD'd but has had two previous AFDs, one closed as Delete, the second as No consensus. The article on his company, SocialBlood was Soft Deleted after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Socialblood. I thought it was time to reexamine this article and consider whether it meets the stricter standards of today's Wikipedia. Liz Read! Talk! 01:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GoggleGoose (talk) 12:35, 21 March 2024 (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.
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 redirect‎ to List of Tamil films of 1999#January — March. Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adutha Kattam

Adutha Kattam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't find any third-party sources. Possibly fails WP:NFILM. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:42, 13 March 2024 (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.
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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indiawin Sports

Indiawin Sports (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTINHERITED. Just because they own a bunch of cricket teams, that doesn't mean that the company itself is notable enough. I don't see enough independent coverage of them (i.e. other than just saying they own these teams) to pass WP:NCORP or WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:48, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • None of those look like WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS to me. Sportskeeda is not a reliable source, as per WP:SPORTSKEEDA, Cric Tracker is a rehashed press release (and the 2 paragraphs about the company looks like something the company has written about themselves), India Today source is just stating how much they paid for a WPL team, as is the BS source (from what I can see, as it's paywalled). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:39, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I'm with Joseph2302 on this one. Of late, we have seen some very low quality sources used to demonstrate widespread coverage. I think that is also the case here. AA (talk) 18:58, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: The company holds various teams across the world. Many times, instead of referring to the brand as ‘Indiawin owned,’ they simply say ‘Mumbai Indians owned’ (the biggest franchise under the brand). This lack of distinction is the reason it didn’t receive enough coverage. Additionally, it is clearly mentioned on the Mumbai Indians website that it is owned by Indiawin Sports. So, if we remove ‘Indiawin Sports’ and need to mention that the franchise is owned by Indiawin, how can we accurately refer to ‘Mumbai Indians’ when it itself is not a standalone brand but rather a franchise within the Indiawin brand? ‎Gorav‎Sharma 08:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the coverage is about the Mumbai Indians cricket team, then it's not coverage about the company. WP:NOTINHERITED applies here- just because the cricket team is notable, that doesn't mean the company that owns them are. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The brand is also notable and came into the limelight after purchasing teams in SLT20 and ILT20. That's why I created the article to simplify everything. The sources I added are trusted sources in the cricket field. Still, if the article goes against Wikipedia policy, I have no problem with its deletion. However, I will still vote to keep this article.
    Have a nice day ahead! ‎Gorav‎Sharma 17:21, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gorav Sharma might be better to make List article, like List of cricket teams owned by Indiawin Sports. S0091 (talk) 17:58, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:25, 27 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shayamal Vallabhjee

Shayamal Vallabhjee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The available sources include passing mentions, interviews, and profiles, although some lack reliability. Notably, there's insufficient substantial coverage from reputable third-party sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. Consequently, it fails to meet the criteria set forth in WP:GNG and WP:BIO. It's crucial to remember that notability isn't inherited, meaning that having notable clients doesn't automatically confer notability. GSS 💬 04:29, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:23, 20 March 2024 (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.
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. ✗plicit 14:15, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invasions of Kiratpur

Invasions of Kiratpur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The entirety of this article is written through primary, non WP:HISTRS sources. Sources like the Suraj Granth and Macaullife were explicitly deprecated here-[2]. Harinder Singh Mehboob's work is self published and the author is a poet, not a historian. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 12:55, 12 March 2024 (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.
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 keep. (non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte (talk) 09:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anant Patel

Anant Patel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Local politician, does not meet the criteria at WP:NPOL. Sourcing (or lack of) is purely routine local media coverage. 𝔓420°𝔓Holla 14:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you MrMkG for your contribution. Could we please centre this discussion around how the available sources establish WP:BLP and WP:NPOL. Thank you, and may God bless you.𝔓420°𝔓Holla 14:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Moriwen: Thanks for that, just to clarify though he represents that district in the Gujarat Legislative Assembly, the state parliament of Gujarat, so he's at an even higher level of government than district level. AusLondonder (talk) 15:41, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're quite right! I stand corrected, thanks.— Moriwen (talk) 15:43, 12 March 2024 (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.
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. Regardless of a G5, it's snowing. Star Mississippi 01:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ayyaloori Subhan Ali

Ayyaloori Subhan Ali (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPOL and I'm unable to find WP:GNG-level sources for this person. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creator has attempted a move back to draftspace, which was quickly reverted. --Finngall talk 13:41, 12 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 21:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Namak Haraam (TV series)

Namak Haraam (TV series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Tag and Prod challenged by IP so here now at AfD. CNMall41 (talk) 18:27, 11 March 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheyyar Polytechnic College

Cheyyar Polytechnic College (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find anything of note online about the College. Appears to be one of a large number of colleges in the area with no particular distinguishing features Newhaven lad (talk) 18:41, 10 March 2024 (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.
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 draftify and merge to the existing draft, which I will carry out now. BD2412 T 03:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Salaar: Part 2 – Shouryaanga Parvam

Salaar: Part 2 – Shouryaanga Parvam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nominating per WP:NYF. Twinkle1990 (talk) 09:37, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I closed this as Draftify only to find that there is a similar draft version.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:26, 17 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 19:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pavithra Murugesan

Pavithra Murugesan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find sufficient coverage of the subject, an Indian women's footballer, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All that came up in my searches were trivial mentions like the ones already present in the article. JTtheOG (talk) 21:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the review. Actually, Pavithra had played for Indian team in the under-15 and Under 17 and after I posted this article she was selected for the main Indian team and not just the probables. Suddenly I had to travel and could not complete it by oversight. There are also a lot of citations in Tamil newspapers also which I plan to add. the article may be drafted, for me to work on and submit for review. The Wiki page on Indian women's football also has her name, where I have taken the red link for creation. Being selected for Indian main team after three successful years as a youth player, she certainly passes notability criteria, I feel. Kindly consider drafting, thanks and regards, Davidindia (talk) 04:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: As nominator, I support draftification until better sourcing is found. JTtheOG (talk) 06:33, 12 March 2024 (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.
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 Draftify‎. (non-admin closure) asilvering (talk) 03:40, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hansraj Raghuwanshi

Hansraj Raghuwanshi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Failed WP:Artist, also WP:GNG, it has only WP:BLP1E. No in-depth article.Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Are there other supporters for draftification?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:04, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Significant independent regional language news coverage with some articles covering their biography. Article in it's current state is indeed in a bad shape, but a quick search turnsup good coverage from reliable sources. Passes #1, #4, #5, #7, #10 of WP:MUSICBIO. Jim Carter 18:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify. Article isn’t well written and doesn’t help establish notability of the subject, but there may be a case there if the article gets some extra work. Because the sources provided are mostly national to India, the article needs to show somehow that these sources indeed demonstrate national coverage as opposed to local coverage.Contributor892z (talk) 21:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 30 March 2024 (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.
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 draftify‎. ✗plicit 14:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdul Salam (BJP politician)

Abdul Salam (BJP politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG clause. CSMention269 (talk) 12:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not re-written particularly well. For example the infobox states "Primary Elected Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha" when he is not a member of parliament. AusLondonder (talk) 07:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have also corrected the error now. Good to go! Otuọcha (talk) 08:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify. I see the creator of the page is actively updating and this is worth to note but I voted to Draftify because I think it is WP:TOOSOON as the politician has been nominated by BJP party for the Muslim-dominated Malappuram seat, and he has yet to take on the IUML’s E T Muhammed Basheer and the CPI(M)’s V Vaseef. If he wins, maybe there will be much larger coverage to consider this politician notable. RangersRus (talk) 20:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand how it meets WP: TOOSOON. Well, I guess the article was not updated by the creator as it seems they are new editors who by WP: COMMONSENSE may not even know what AFD meant. I took up the article since clearly by research, the subject meets WP: PROF having been a VC of a notable university and thus supported by Verifiable sources. I do see WP: GNG even when sources where added like [3] by Wikishovel. In clear way, The article when created was on Politics, but after much look, I found Academics which he met. All the Best! Otuọcha (talk) 06:49, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "applies to recent events, people, new products and any other topics about which facts have only recently emerged or are still emerging." RangersRus (talk) 13:30, 14 March 2024 (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.
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 without prejudice against early REFUND if SIGCOV is found. Owen× ☎ 19:38, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ashok Attri (diplomat)

Ashok Attri (diplomat) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ambassador who doesn't appear to pass WP:GNG. The citations in the article do not appear to pass WP:GNG, and the closest I could find with Google search was this one newspaper article, which looks a bit short and routine. It is my understanding that diplomats/ambassadors do not auto pass WP:NPOL or WP:ANYBIO. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Africa, Oman, Denmark, United States of America, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning keep. I can't find enough for WP:GNG. However, I consider this a pass of WP:ANYBIO#2 because he's going to come up in writings about relations of India with Oman, Denmark, Zambia. And he passes ANYBIO#1 as a recepient of one of Oman's highest civilian honours. Someone's going to write who all have received that award and there, write something about who he is and what he did to get that award. Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And he passes ANYBIO#1 as a recepient of one of Oman's highest civilian honours. Got a citation? I don't see it in the article. If Ashok Attri received the Order of Al-Said, I'll withdraw this AFD. –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:26, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Novem Linguae, This is what I found. I don't think this is that. That appears to be for heads of states; this appears to be for diplomats. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:59, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Novem Linguae. Ashok received Wisam al-Na'Oman, or The Order of N'Oman per TOI. This is the highest Omani honor for diplomats, which was started by Sulatn Al Qaboos in 1982. You may wish to see Honor's description in this book by Guy Stair Sainty and Rafal Heydel-Mankoo from 2006.
    • World Orders of Knighthood & Merit - Page 1439.
    Maliner (talk) 07:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Attri has served as India's ambassador to Denmark and Oman and a high-ranking member of its missions in Zambia and the US, and took up his last post c. 2010. So it's likely that much of the available sources are a) in Arabic, Danish, Hindi and other Indian languages, and b) in print newspapers. A simple Google search isn't going to find any of that up, and as such I don't think this nomination presents adequate grounds for deletion. Searching just in Danish turns up dozens of sources, especially with regard to the Niels Holck extradition, a diplomatic dispute between Denmark and India in 2011 in which, as the Indian ambassador to Denmark, Attri was obviously a key figure.[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] This case was also covered in the English press[12] and doubtless even more so in Hindi and Bengali, but I don't have the language skills to search for those. – Joe (talk) 20:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I don't find any significant coverage in Denmark. How are the above hits about Ashok Attri? I know from Denmark's neighboring country (Norway) that the only foreign ambassadors who attract media attention about their person are those of the US and Israel. Having a key role in an "affair" is an argument for merging with said affair. Receiving orders is common for diplomats. Geschichte (talk) 09:59, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't say there was significant coverage (there might be, I wasn't really checking). My point was that offline sources and sources in languages other than English are very likely to exist and that, unless those are checked, we can't properly assess the level of coverage. I take the fact that five minutes of searching, in a language that I only have limited proficient in, produced eight additional sources as a strong indication that significant coverage is probably out there.
    A merge would only be appropriate if Attri had a key role in one event. Given the he was an ambassador or high-level diplomat to multiple countries over at least two decades, I find that implausible, but you never know. – Joe (talk) 11:17, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This whole premise gravitates to "there must be sources out there" and "He's bound to be notable in other languages", both of which do not amount to much. -The Gnome (talk) 18:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:16, 16 March 2024 (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.
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. czar 19:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chetan P. U. Science College

Chetan P. U. Science College (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find anything notable about the College. Newhaven lad (talk) 18:31, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried, too. Couldn't agree more. This College is not notable, and it should be deleted, WIKIPEDA (yes i meant to misspell it) (talk) 19:13, 8 March 2024 (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.
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. czar 19:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Partha Pratim Bora

Partha Pratim Bora (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable politician failed WP:NPOL, also WP:GNG. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 18:44, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a compelling reason for it be speedily deleted. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 18:02, 9 March 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 18:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St. Mary's College, Thoothukudi

St. Mary's College, Thoothukudi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find anything of note online. The College may have relatively poor rankings (151/200 according to Collegedunia.com). No indication of interesting history or connections Newhaven lad (talk) 19:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:38, 22 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:43, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Chandighat (1771)

Battle of Chandighat (1771) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article fails to meet WP:GNG. None of the Reliable Sources referenced mention the "Battle of Chandighat (1771)," nor has any historian referred to it as such. The title is an invented designation for a military conflict that occurred at a location referred to as "X." Therefore, the article was titled "Battle of X," which is entirely inappropriate. Moreover, the content within the article is so sparse that it could easily be incorporated into one of the parent articles. Imperial[AFCND] 10:59, 8 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs about Bareilly

List of songs about Bareilly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Same reason as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about Oslo. The list fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:LISTN and WP:OR. There is little to nothing worthwhile in this list, be it content or context. Geschichte (talk) 11:45, 8 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs about Ahmedabad

List of songs about Ahmedabad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Same reason as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about Oslo. The list fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:LISTN and WP:OR. There is little to nothing worthwhile in this list, be it content or context. Geschichte (talk) 11:47, 8 March 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 21:25, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sparsh Srivastav

Sparsh Srivastav (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find any Independent sources and the subject does not meet WP:NACTOR yet. Rydex64 (talk) 16:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:33, 21 March 2024 (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.
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 redirect‎ to IDBI Bank. ✗plicit 11:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IDBI Capital

IDBI Capital (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced, written like a LinkedIn page, can't find anything on Google BrigadierG (talk) 11:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:14, 20 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:08, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vedant Institute of Management & Technology

Vedant Institute of Management & Technology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As it stands - this article makes no sense. The College is described as closing in 2019 - but as offering courses. It is not listed as a College in the local district website (Hapur). Can't find contemporary online references. Newhaven lad (talk) 17:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:58, 12 March 2024 (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.
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 delete arguments made their case. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

R. Indira

R. Indira (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable per WP:NPROF, and does not seem to be meeting WP:GNG. Mentions in secondary source such as Indian Express are running. Also, Chairs/Positions held are non-notable, with multiple department heads/chairs in a single university, mostly on a rotational basis. Publications are journals and chapters(as done by virtually all professors), not full books. Secretary position in said society is below president, and is organisational in nature. User4edits (talk) 13:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's the Festschrifts that take the article over the line for me. 1c says The publication of an anniversary or memorial journal volume or a Festschrift dedicated to a particular person is usually enough to satisfy Criterion 1, except in the case of publication in vanity, fringe, or non-selective journals or presses. Do you think the two publishers, Concept Publishing and Roopa Prakasana, are vanity / fringe / non-selective? I don't know anything about them. Tacyarg (talk) 15:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Concept Publishing certainly resembles a vanity publisher, considering the very wide range of topics it publishes on, including basically illiterate pseudoscientific treatises on homeopathy. I can't tell what's going on with Rupa Prakashana since its "About Us" and "How to Publish" links don't load for me. JoelleJay (talk) 06:22, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:46, 19 March 2024 (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.
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 keep‎. (non-admin closure) 🍪 CookieMonster 13:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jarowar Jhumko

Jarowar Jhumko (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG. Previous AfD ended in no consensus. DonaldD23 talk to me 13:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:45, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:15, 19 March 2024 (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.
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. ✗plicit 05:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TIDEL Park Coimbatore

TIDEL Park Coimbatore (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nominating for deletion under WP: NOTDIRECTORY. The article consists almost entirely of a list of companies that have offices in the complex. The only source about the complex I could find was this, which isn't nearly enough to establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:20, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Draftify or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Per NOTDIR. Draftify might not be a good option since the IT park per se in not notable and I couldn't find any sources with SIGCOV for the park itself. In future, if any notability arises, a draft can be created, but no point in keeping a directory entry of the buildings present in the IT park now, most of which are just uncited non notable OR or random entries. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:26, 25 March 2024 (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.
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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aa Bhi Ja O Piya

Aa Bhi Ja O Piya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NFILM Tehonk (talk) 20:40, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

--->changing to Keep in light of 2nd review (see below).-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • First added link is a press release as it can be seen from from URL structure, writer name as "ANI PR" and the disclaimer at the end: "This story is auto-generated from a syndicated feed. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content." These press releases can't be used to determine notability. Its "strong box office start" claim also contradicts the second link's "opening: very poor" statement. Tehonk (talk) 19:11, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, don’t use it, then, and feel free to remove it from the page. It’s a mirror of a link I did not manage to format properly. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC) PS- I took the liberty to do it myself and put the original ANI link mentioning the contradiction you have noted.[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is support for Redirection from editors, especially nominator.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in favor of deleting per NOTDIRECTORY, apart from insufficient coverage, the "widely distributed" part of the criterion doesn't seem to be met either. Tehonk (talk) 22:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NFILM requires reviews from nationally known film critics and not just any review in any publication. Pankaj Pandey, the author of the text in Raj Express, does not satisfy aforesaid criterion. We still only have about one half of a review-cum-advertorial. -The Gnome (talk) 09:47, 14 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete While Raj Express is an independent and reliable source that can be used because of its editorial oversight, the other source from Film Information cannot be considered an independent review. It was posted by Film Information desk without any specific author, and these types of posts are generally part of press releases and paid branding. So, this film does not meet WP:NFILM with only one review. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:36, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I cannot see why Komal Nahta's FIlm Information should be considered unreliable nor not independent. As for the general assumption that these types of posts are generally part of press releases and paid branding., applying it to the present case does not seem exactly obvious.... just look at the review. If that is a PR data copy-paste, with such PR who needs enemies?:D -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:54, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No matter who owns Film Information, but for Indian films, I believe the review should be from a named critic because there are many websites that publish paid reviews and articles. – DreamRimmer (talk) 02:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Which does really not seem to be the case here but thank you for your reply. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:53, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I'm seeing No consensus right now. This might be time for a source analysis table.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: most of the sources are press releases/announcements. ANI is marginally reliable at best and neither article was written by them. One is attributed to SRV which is a digital marketing agency and the other to NewsVoir which is a press release service. I share DreamRimmer's concern about Film Information insofar as there is not a named author and it is not a widely used source so does not appear to meet "nationally known critic" per WP:NFILM. That leaves maybe one critical review which is not enough. No issue with redirecting though. S0091 (talk) 14:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep. The Film Information and Raj Express reviews both look usable to me. In particular Film Information describes itself as "the most widely read film trade magazine in the film industry and is known as the industry’s Bible since 49 years. Founded by late Shri Ramraj Nahta, it is being run by his son, Komal Nahta, since 1993 when Shri Nahta passed away." That is as something at least trying to be a reliable source and not a fan site. Note also that the review is negative enough that it is pretty clear not a paid ad. Also, the Bhaskar.com source looked probably reliable to me as reportage of rather than copying a press release, but I can't read the whole thing. In short I would rate the sources as just over rather than just short of the WP:NFILM line. If there is no consensus to keep the article, a redirect to List_of_Hindi_films_of_2022#October–December is certainly a reasonable ATD. Eluchil404 (talk) 03:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - non-notable short. The sources are not impressive. Even the better sources fail to establish notability. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:28, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The two reviews cited in the discussion appear to be enough. Komal Nahta, the writer of Film Information, appears to be a subject matter expert in film because he is relied upon by RSes, for example: [14] and [15]. Raj Express is an RS that appears to circulate in several major cities in India. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:14, 1 April 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 01:16, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karnataka Forest Service

Karnataka Forest Service (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Zero secondary sources, no evidence of notability AusLondonder (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure the article is intended to be about the department. It seems to be about a role, it says the Karnataka Forest Service "is awarded to a person who is selected in the KFS exam conducted by Karnataka Public Service Commission" AusLondonder (talk) 11:53, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right, but that's clearly a content issue, and Afd is not cleanup. Brusquedandelion (talk) 07:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You know what, I thought about it and you're right. Not one sentence in the article as written is actually about the department as such; it would be better to nuke it and rewrite. Brusquedandelion (talk) 02:29, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Karnataka Forest Department per above. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I have changed my vote. I agree an article should exist for Karnataka Forest Department, but this one isn't even pretend to be about that. Brusquedandelion (talk) 02:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that's what I'm saying. The department itself may very well be notable, but this article is not about the department. It's barely clear what it's about. AusLondonder (talk) 02:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. See my latest reply to your comment. Brusquedandelion (talk) 07:18, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, a review of recently found sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. A source eval would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:17, 21 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mayadhar Swain

Mayadhar Swain (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No proof of notability, no reliable sources that back up claims. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 17:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Has been actively edited recently so do not want to close as soft-delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree.The overwhelming merit and scholarship of his books and articles have been widely acknowledged.Article on him is very much worthy.His works are in public sphere.Reasons for deletion will amount to travesty of justice to noted original writer and apparently not tenable. JAMKUM (talk) 13:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JAMKUM, if you want this article to be kept, you're going to have to show some good sources. See WP:RS. -- asilvering (talk) 20:15, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mayadhar Swain a very popular science writer of Odisha for last three decades.His books and articles are of great scholarship and originality.It should be expanded further highlighting his works.It should not be deleted at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.222.186.29 (talk) 11:37, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Those editors advocating Keep would be advised to offer some reliable sourcing that could be used in the article instead of just making claims. I think there is enough objection to this deletion proposal that Soft Deletion is not an option here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:45, 19 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vipin Reshammiya

Vipin Reshammiya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO, WP:CREATIVE, WP:BIO or WP:GNG. I can find only passing mentions of him in reliable English and Hindi sources, nearly always in connection with his notable son Himesh Reshammiya. I did find this quote from him in a RS book, but that's effectively a WP:Primary source. He's worked with some notable people on some notable films, but on Wikipedia notability is not inherited. We could redirect to Himesh Reshammiya as an ATD, but I'm bringing it to AFD for discussion. Wikishovel (talk) 11:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist, as there is an unbolded Keep vote in these comments, I don't think Soft Deletion is appropriate. It would be helpful to get a response from the article creator User:ArjunKR92 and a review of the sources brought up in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 12 March 2024 (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.
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. At first blush, it would appear that views are evenly split. Closer inspection reveals that the Delete views are anchored in guidelines, while the Keep ones are of the OTHERSTUFFEXISTS or WP:NEXIST type, without providing any sources. We all recognize the impact of WP:BIAS when it comes to non-Western topics, and are willing to lower the notability threshold accordingly. But we can't lower this threshold to zero. This deletion is without prejudice against an early REFUND if even a single SIGCOV source is found. Owen× ☎ 18:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

321 Medium Regiment (India)

321 Medium Regiment (India) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reviewed under NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. I'm normally pretty lenient on military unit articles because they tend to be very enclyclopedic but IMO this one is pretty far out there. Content is basically just "it exists" plus a note of participation sourced to a Twitter/X page. Other than the Twitter/X page one is just a government gazette to support a "mentioned in a dispatch" statement and a stamp page to support a gun type and founding date sentence. North8000 (talk) 17:43, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:06, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I’m not convinced that more exhaustive searches wouldn’t demonstrate notability. For example, there are a lot of regional/local newspapers in India and a lot of them aren’t indexed or even on the web.
That said, the article is rather stubby compared to other “Regiments” (battalions) of the Indian Artillery.
But I think the best course of action would be to let it sit for months to years and see if it gets expanded.
I strongly suspect this is a case of non-searchable SIGCOV being assumed not to exist i.e. WP:BIAS. Indian Army units don’t have the same Web footprint as American or British ones. Just how it is.
10:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC) RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 10:13, 17 March 2024 (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.
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 keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 05:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muzaffar Aazim

Muzaffar Aazim (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poet doesn't meet WP:SIGCOV thus fails WP:GNG. Macbeejack ☎ 12:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:06, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:45, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:04, 17 March 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 02:01, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Official scripts of the Republic of India

Official scripts of the Republic of India (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm not sure how to classify what's wrong with this article. As far as I can tell, most of these scripts are not "official". They are simply the conventional writing systems for the named languages. It's not quite nonsense, but it's pretty close. PepperBeast (talk) 22:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Things that happen in Western world are pretty much different in India. Indian languages uses multiple scripts, unlike European languages. So, regarding official usages, these languages need certain writing systems to be used officially, and Latin script is most of the time discarded in preference to the native Indian scripts. But Latin script is specifically officialised in many cases as well. Moreover, more than one native script are also employed officially multiple times. --Haoreima (talk) 18:10, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're reiterating that they're official and adding a reason why it's necessary for one to be official (presupposing that one is official), but I'm questioning the claim that they are official and you haven't pointed to evidence supporting that claim. As I wrote here earlier, of all the language acts listed as references, only the one from Manipur says anything about an official writing system. Largoplazo (talk) 18:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, scripts that are official are mentioned explicitly in their official language acts and bills, passed by their state governments as well as the Union Government. For example,
  • here, in the Assam Official Language Act, it is mentioned that Bodo language should be written in Devanagari script.
  • here, in Maharashtra official language act, it is mentioned that Marathi language should be written in Devanagari. By the way, Modi script was not chosen for Marathi.
  • here, in Haryana official language act, it is mentioned that Hindi should be written in Devanagari and Punjabi should be written in Gurmukhi script.
  • here, in Chhattisgarh official language act, it is mentioned that Chhattisgarhi language should be written in Devanagari script.
  • here, in Punjab official language act, it is mentioned that Punjabi should be written in Gurmukhi script. This is contrasting to Pakistan's official language act legalising Shahmukhi script instead of Gurmukhi script for Punjabi language.
  • Haoreima (talk) 19:18, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, thanks, you are indeed correct. In other words, only (except for Manipur) acts from states and union territories that aren't included as references in the article! Ironic. Even Assam doesn't, unless I missed it, specify the writing system to use for Assamese. Well, so far, that gives us Meetei Mayek, Bengali, Devanagari, and Gumurkhi. Manipur, Assam (partly), Maharashtra, Haryana, Chhattisgarh, and Punjab specify scripts; Assam (partly), Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi, Goa, Gujarat and Pondicherry appear not to. I wonder about the rest. Largoplazo (talk) 21:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most Hindi speaking states specifically mention that Hindi be written in Devanagari script, in addition to the same being said in national level. Haoreima (talk) 21:58, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you provide sources for that claim? Brusquedandelion (talk) 01:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Himachal Pradesh official language act mentions that Hindi and Sanskrit be written in Devanagari. However, Sanskrit is unofficially written widely in Kannada, Malayalam, Tamil, Gupta Grantha, Brahmi scripts. Haoreima (talk) 04:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Devanagari is one of the four I already noted. What I'm getting at now is, if this article keeps its current title, how many of the scripts it currently covers are going to need to be removed as off-topic. Largoplazo (talk) 01:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those whose legal acts didn't explicitly mention their writing systems could be removed. But if another reliable third party sources backed their claims, they could be readded. Haoreima (talk) 04:08, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I added the actual official script info over at Languages with official status in India. PepperBeast (talk) 23:17, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:26, 9 March 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 21:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

315Work Avenue

315Work Avenue (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not appear to meet WP:NCOMPANY. Although the presented sources are reliable, coverage is nothing more than WP:ROUTINE. Hitro talk 07:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • NOTE I've blocked a couple of participants in this AfD as part of a UPE group that have been pushing the same articles over the past four years and evading salting protections by creating the articles under different titles. This article title doesn't seem to fall under that evasion but the participant link (sock/meat) is established through the other articles. —SpacemanSpiff 03:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final Relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:36, 15 March 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 16:00, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Rohilla

Battle of Rohilla (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Negligible mention of the battle in the acceptable sources listed here. Most of the article appears to be written from the Gurbilas Patshahi, which is a primary source and has been explicitly deprecated by admins-[28]. The two other sources, Hari Ram Gupta and Fauja Singh's work, make only passing mention of this battle; both are short paragraphs, and are identical to one another. Tony Jacques' source is a tertiary one, with thousands of short entries related to thousands of battles spanning fom Europe to the Americas to Africa to Asia which took place over hundreds of years. It too only contains a few sentences about this battle. This event clearly does not deserve an entire Wikipedia article since it fails WP:SIGCOV-[29]. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 04:47, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And the source by Tony Jacques? UnbiasedSN (talk) 06:41, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is a tertiary source which includes a very short summary of thousands of battles which took place around the world, from Europe to South Asia to North America to Africa, spanning hundreds of years. While the source could be used to bolster reliable, secondary sources with a strong focus on South Asian history, on a standalone basis, it is quite weak and only serves as a complementary, auxillary source. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 01:21, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:24, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:39, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note to closer: I updated the article, removed the OR and the content sourced from the deprecated primary source, Gurbilas Patshahi. The current state of the article is a reflection of the coverage from its sources. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 05:30, 22 March 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 03:34, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anubhav Wadhwa

Anubhav Wadhwa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable, WP:1E, and is promotional, returned from CSD User4edits (talk) 17:08, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: Source 1 and 14 are about him in RS, rest is used to colour the discussion. Doesn't really mention it in the article, but the tire recycling/disposal website seems to be notable. Article has a PROMO tone but can be rewritten. Oaktree b (talk) 00:10, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:TOOSOON and WP:NOTWEBHOST. Barely out of his teens, this is a nice young man who hasn't really done much yet. Lastly, this appears to be written so as to be a social media page, not a real article. In 2024, everyone knows that. Bearian (talk) 20:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:26, 11 March 2024 (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.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kolkur Sadashivapet Indian Railways

Proposed deletions

Files for deletion

Category discussion debates

Template discussion debates

Redirects for deletion

MFD discussion debates

Other deletion discussions

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/India&oldid=1213843199"