Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agradoot

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 Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 15:12, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agradoot

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

Delete: as non-notable cruft. Quis separabit? 13:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Close as nomination withdrawn and/or keep (upon reconsideration). Quis separabit? 14:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 19:21, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 19:21, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 19:21, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:54, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as my searches found nothing good and it's not surprising considering the age and world location. SwisterTwister talk 06:34, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: And that's a very clear keep. I just added 15 book sources. On agradoot film I get 288 Google Book hits, the first ~100 appear to be relevant, the rest likely not. What do you see when you search? Pinging Rms125a@hotmail.com SwisterTwister. -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 03:18, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Sam Sailor -- thank you for pinging me. I appreciate your improvements (which appear to come directly from this link) and am willing to reconsider the nomination, however I would like to hear from other editors. Thanks. Quis separabit? 03:24, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, but my question was not addressed in your reply. I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish by assumingyour improvements (which appear to come directly from this link), and I take no offense, as you are wrong: My changes to the lead consisted of (a) using {{lang-bn}}, (b) adding the short last line "The group was active up to the end of 1980s.", (c) changing the grammatical tense accordingly, and (d) adding book sources. The article has been more or less stable since 2008, so the kff.in page would appear to be a mirror with a slight addition; although the opposite is possible as well: kff.in was registered in 2007. Wayback Machine has not archived the page. In short my searches never had to encompass the world wide web as book sources were abundantly available. What does a Google Book search return when you perform it? -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 15:49, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"What does a Google Book search return when you perform it?" -- quite little, but you are right about non-www sourcing. Quis separabit? 14:50, 14 September 2015 (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.