Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uttarakhand Handloom and Handicraft Development Council

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. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:15, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Uttarakhand Handloom and Handicraft Development Council (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:NORG, WP:GNG Hemant Dabral^Talk 21:56, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2020 March 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:09, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:59, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A simple google check provides numerous references and sources. The nominator should have googled and helped expand the article Afterall the wikipedia project is collaborative in nature .Shyamsunder (talk) 11:53, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Why this should be deleted when it can be improved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bvatsal61 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because it fails WP:N. – Hemant Dabral^Talk 15:13, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then see [1][2], subject is notable. Bvatsal61 (talk) 09:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:19, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:19, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per what I said above. Bvatsal61 (talk) 05:09, 28 March 2020 (UTC) [reply]
• Delete WP:NORG controls here. We need significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable secondary sources. I agree that WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, I also note the question is one of what sources exist, not which ones are found in the article. However of the references provided [3][4] do not satisfy the requirement for WP:ORGDEPTH. The two additional references in google news beyond those provided above, also have this issue. The broader google search finds only a small amount of additional coverage of a handful of marketing deals. In sum English language searches do not uncover anything that satisfies WP:ORGDEPTH. At a deeper level, content must be neutral and verifiable, the only neutral and verifiable things that can be said are that this organization exists and has struck a few deals, but Wikipedia is not a directory. Would be willing to strike and reconsider if non-English sources show that WP:NORG is in fact met. Spectrum {{UV}} 2604:2000:8FC0:4:68BA:3B32:8613:8B6D (talk) 17:05, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Doesn't matter whether the article can be improved if it lacks evidence of basic notability. A search yields no in-depth coverage by reliable, independent sources. Does not meet threshold for notability. Glendoremus (talk) 19:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Google News search suggests sufficient coverage of related initiatives to establish basic notability and verifiability for a government agency. --Spasemunki (talk) 03:50, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect to Government of Uttarakhand - not seeing the significant, in-depth coverage here. Neutrality^talk 15:12, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Lacks depth of coverage, as per Glendoremus. Cheers, 1292simon (talk)

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.