Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

Shortcuts

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:

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.
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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Should you have India related questions, ask at, Notice board for India-related topics.

See also: Points to remember when debating in India related deletion discussions.
Note: AnomieBOT removes and archives closed debates from this page a few times a day, so there is no need to manually remove such pages.
Deletion sorting by state or union territory:

India

Sudarshan Chakra (air defence system)

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

This was previously redirected to S-400 missile system, but was reverted and asked to take to a deletion discussion. The article is a pure POV fork of the main S-400 article. It is the exact same system, simply called by an alternative name. Reliable sources do not widely refer to the S-400, even in Indian usage, as "Sudarshan Chakra" so it fails WP:COMMONNAME even if it were a separate article. The Sudarshan Chakra (air defence system) article should be deleted, and the page redirected to S-400 missile system. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 18:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and India. Shellwood (talk) 18:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naveen Singh Suhag

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

Subject does not meet GNG. The sources are mostly not independent (press releases, interviews, a paper written by the subject, company profiles). The ToI article [1] might be sigcov of a company he founded, but the only parts about the subject are quotes from him. This [2] contains a four-sentence mention but really isn't focused on him. The only information I can find in Swiss media is that a person with his exact full name seems to have opened a Subway sandwich store in Langenthal, but the coverage all comes from one source (Berner Zeitung) and is mostly quotes. There are also two hits for his name in reports on judo competitions, far from sigcov. Toadspike [Talk] 15:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Switzerland. Shellwood (talk) 15:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Wrestling. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete not notable. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 19:36, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vattan Sandhu

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

Doesn't pass WP:SINGER andWP:NACTOR. No coverage in reliable sources. Afstromen (talk) 09:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Music, Asia, India, and Punjab. Afstromen (talk) 09:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indradhanu (TV Channel)

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

Insufficient significant coverage, at least in English. One article is not enough. There may be more coverage in Assamese, thus the AfD nomination instead of proposed deletion. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 08:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Assam. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 08:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pammi Baweja

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

No coverage in reliable publications. Afstromen (talk) 08:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 08:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Article clearly fails WP:NBASIC. Chronos.Zx (talk) 15:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Narinder Batth

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

His work might seem notable, but the lack of coverage in reliable sources indicates that he is not notable Afstromen (talk) 08:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Music, Asia, India, and Punjab. Afstromen (talk) 08:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment; did you look for punjabi language sources? AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

R. Arun Kumar

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

Unable to find any significant coverage that can satisfy WP:NPOL. The references are about his appointment as a member of a political party. I would be more happy if you provide any in-depth coverage. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:06, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, India, and Odisha. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:06, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; does not meet WP:NPOL or WP:GNG; with the exception of this source, all sources in the article are about the new members of the party being elected, so indepth sources cannot be guaranteed. Nothing other than the sources in the article showed up on Google. ToadetteEdit (7M articles) 07:02, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or Draftify : This article has more citations than many biography articles in Wikipedia. There are atleast three sources having significant coverage on the subject. (https://www.deshabhimani.com/deshabhimani-english-/cpim-24th-party-congress-54751/new-members-to-cpim-polit-bureau-98849) (https://www.deccanchronicle.com/southern-states/telangana/cpm-elects-arun-kumar-to-politburo-1871349) (https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1AD2Cs3QrY/) More sources can be added with time. So deletion is not the curation option. The article can be draftified if most editors think that this article needs improvement.
XYZ 250706 (talk) 09:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have found three articles written by the subject on NewsClick. (https://www.newsclick.in/author/r-arun-kumar) I think these can be added as his political views. XYZ 250706 (talk) 09:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sofiya Qureshi

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

Non-notable officer, fails GNG (Note: most of the sources from the article are either dead, or made-up links which doesn't exist early but designed in a way to made it notable, kindly cross-check if I'm wrong ). Also, I checked on Google, where sources are available in 2016 when she became first women to head an army contingent, with latest routine sources in 2025. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 04:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 04:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The article meets both WP:GNG and WP:MILPEOPLE. The subject is the first Indian woman to lead an all-male UN peacekeeping contingent, a role covered in The Times of India, UN News, and Sainik Samachar. The 2025 events and awards are fictional placeholders for current/future updates and should be trimmed, not deleted entirely. The core notability is verifiable, independently covered, and encyclopedic. Recommend trimming uncited or speculative material and keeping the article. EduExplorer47 (talk) 06:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Military. Shellwood (talk) 09:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: The subject is super notable, so she's clearly passes WP:GNG. News about the subject has been consistently appearing for years, and according to the article, the subject has also won several notable awards. I believe this is sufficient to justify keeping the article on Wikipedia. I had also created a separate article titled Sophia Qureshi, perhaps unintentionally. If any senior editor wishes to merge both articles, they are welcome to do so. Thank you. Baqi:) (talk) 11:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will note that. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 15:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sofiya Qureshi is HIGHLY relevant at the moment for her roles in press conferences. Atharva210 (talk) 14:33, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bahishti Zewar

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

There is no doubt that the subject is notable as a book. However, the authorship of the book is highly disputed, and even the content variations are debatable. This issue has been discussed by Ahlehaqmedia, a scholarly website. In its current form, the article would need to be entirely rewritten based on reliable sources. Given the present structure and sourcing, it is not suitable as a standalone article. I propose redirecting it to the article on Ashraf Ali Thanwi.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 15:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and India. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 15:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per WP:DINC 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amit Berwal

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

Fails WP:BIO. A search for sources largely turned up passing mentions which only note his position as the bodyguard unit commandant, without providing any WP:SIGCOV about him. At most we have this Indian Express piece on the unit in which Berwal provides details on the unit - but again, no sigcov about the person himself. Java Hurricane 11:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, India, and Delhi. Java Hurricane 11:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is too early to create an article about him. Agletarang (talk) 18:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arjun Ambati

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

fails WP:NACTOR. Theroadislong (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, India, and Andhra Pradesh. Theroadislong (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article should be kept as Arjun Ambati is a notable figure in the Telugu film industry. He has a significant filmography, with key roles in well-known projects, and his work has been covered by various media outlets. Additionally, he has a Google Knowledge Panel, which is an indicator of recognition and notability in the public domain.

I am working on adding more reliable sources, including interviews and articles from established media, to strengthen the article. His contributions to the industry further demonstrate his standing and relevance.

Thank you for considering my input. Kanthrajmys (talk) 08:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Google knowledge panel does not mean anything in terms of notability at Wikipedia. --bonadea contributions talk 08:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – there is no coverage at all of him in independent sources, much less any significant coverage. --bonadea contributions talk 08:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback and for reviewing the article. I would like to gently highlight that Arjun Ambati has been covered by independent and reliable sources such as The Times of India, Eenadu, Sakshi, and Andhra Jyothy. His work in Telugu television and cinema has also been featured on platforms like Gemini TV and Telugu Filmnagar. While I understand that a Google Knowledge Panel alone doesn't establish notability, it does suggest public interest and recognition. I’m continuing to improve the article by adding more reliable sources.
Thanks again for your time and consideration. Kanthrajmys (talk) 08:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jnanpith award and Kannada

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

WP:NOPAGE. This article just serves to highlight the winners of the Jnanpith Award who wrote in Kannada. This information is already available at Jnanpith Award. Not a plausible redirect. Astaire (talk) 22:58, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and India. Astaire (talk) 22:58, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No need for a separate article. -- Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 14:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Gjs238 (talk) 22:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This can just be included in the main page. Jmertel23 (talk) 22:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nomination. Rahmatula786 (talk) 04:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Puviyur

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

Unreferenced stub with no sources that I could find, seems to not even be a legally recognized governmental entity and probably fails WP:NPLACE. South Azerbaijani Wikipedia has an article on this subject, but it is similarly unreferenced. -Samoht27 (talk) 21:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Asia, India, and Tamil Nadu. -Samoht27 (talk) 21:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment did you look for Tamil sources? AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 22:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete while researching for the Paramarthalingapuram AfD, I found that Puviyor does not appear in this Tamil Nadu census document -- [3] -- , meaning that it isn't a census designated place (India equivalent) and fails WP:NPLACE as mentioned by nominator. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 23:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable and no significant coverage or sources available to establish notability. Coldupnorth (talk) 08:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paramarthalingapuram

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

Unreferenced article with very few sources found, and the few that do exist are not in-depth coverage. The South Azerbaijani version of the article is similarly unreferenced. -Samoht27 (talk) 21:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Asia, India, and Tamil Nadu. -Samoht27 (talk) 21:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
comment The coordinates are too imprecise to allow validating this against maps. Mangoe (talk) 22:25, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Bad source, I know, but I found this on apple maps. This place doesn't show up on Indian geosurvey maps; the census website wouldn't load -- would be great if someone checked that. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 22:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- upon further research, I found this census document--https://cdn.s3waas.gov.in/s38fe0093bb30d6f8c31474bd0764e6ac0/uploads/2018/04/2018042514.pdf -- doesn't look like this is a census designated place, failing WP:NPLACE. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 23:18, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable. No significant coverage, I could find no sources to establish notability. Coldupnorth (talk) 08:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete agree with nominator. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 19:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Belenso T. Yimchunger ISRO Certificate Controversy

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

WP:BLPCRIME. The prod was removed because "WP:BLPCRIME only applies when the editor has a serious conflict of interest with the subject of the article. " which is completely incorrect. This is a WP:BLP1E known for only issue, a minor accusation of fabricating a certificate. Fram (talk) 11:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Spaceflight and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. This does not seem WP:LASTING enough to be worthy of an article. silviaASH (inquire within) 12:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nagaland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:56, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:57, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:NEVENT, and although framed as an article about an event and not about the person, WP:BLP1E, and WP:BIO1E also feel very relevant. This is a low profile individual involved in a minor "scandal". Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 08:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:MILL. Tabloid newspapers in India report on an issue. The said tabloids boost the issue's popularity, and TV stations jump on the bandwagon. One brave outlet discovers and reports on the mistake. Indian media then turns on the subject, who did something stupid but not criminal. Rinse, repeat, and move onto the next overhyped story, much beloved by the Indian media. Maybe cause a war with a neighboring country. Then they sue us. Bearian (talk) 23:36, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kadanthodu

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

Non-notable. No significant coverages. References/sources could not be found to establish notability Coldupnorth (talk) 08:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article consists of vague descriptions of ancient history and non-specific claims that add up to nothing of substance. Celjski Grad (talk) 19:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. My research shows that it fails notability and the article is too informative and promotional. These type of articles should be minimal in information with the notable claims in the form of citationsAlmandavi (talk) 05:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Adil Hussain Shah

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

The article fails WP:Notability requirements, especially WP:1E and WP:BLP1E. Article subect was not consequential to the attack, and there is almost no extended relevance or notability of the subject. It is unlikely that the subject will receive continued significant coverage that could have potentially fulfilled the notability requirements. Perevious PROD discussion is here. Celjski Grad (talk) 08:17, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, and Jammu and Kashmir. Shellwood (talk) 10:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: failed WP:Notability. Not notable for a wikipedia article just because 'he try to defend shooting and got killed in a terror attack'.

雄奇 (talk) 13:05, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infinity learn

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

it fails to demonstrate notability through independent, reliable sources, relying instead on press releases and affiliated content. Its promotional tone and lack of in-depth third-party coverage make it unsuitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Xrimonciam (talk) 08:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Xrimonciam (talk) 08:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:22, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Technology, Internet, and Telangana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Definately promo in tone, and most sources are not independant coverage. Maybe merge reliably sourced content to Sri Chaitanya Educational Institutions (please ping on reply) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern regarding the notability and reliance on affiliated sources. I've already removed several promotional or affiliated references and replaced them with some independent sources that I believe are more neutral and reliable.

Could you please guide me further on the kind of changes that would align this article with Wikipedia's notability guidelines? Specifically:

Are there certain sources currently in the article that still do not meet the standard of independence and reliability?
Would adding coverage from particular types of third-party publications (e.g. newspapers, academic journals, industry reviews) help establish notability?
Are there tone-related areas you feel still read as promotional?

I'm eager to improve the article and would appreciate any specific suggestions you can offer to help bring it in line with Wikipedia's expectations. Mahendra2601 (talk) 13:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mahendra2601 Just a quick question, were you paid for creating this article? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:38, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not paid to create this article. I came across a podcast of their CEO, talking about ai integration from school level which made me feel it deserved a proper page on Wikipedia. My intentions are purely to contribute meaningfully based on public interest and available verifiable information. If you have any suggestions or concerns about the content, I’m happy to discuss and improve it further. Mahendra2601 (talk) 02:21, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails WP:NCORP. I G11'd this last time it was created and this version is not fundamentally better. Sourcing does not satisfy WP:ORGIND, essentially consisting of rehashed press releases. ~ A412 ^talk! 14:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have rewritten the article again and cited only reliable source only. Please have a look and let me know if i need to make any further change. correct it grammatically Mahendra2601 (talk) 09:57, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The writing has improved but the sourcing has not. I continue to not see any sources that pass the intellectual independence bar of WP:ORGIND, all being based on announcements provided directly by the company. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:15, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ramanuj Pratap Singh Deo

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

In the article, except for one source from Lallantop, all other sources only mention the name in relation to cheetah hunting. These do not provide significant coverage to meet WP:GNG, WP:BLP, or WP:SIGCOV criteria. Therefore, the article should be deleted. SachinSwami (talk) 08:22, 6 May 2025 (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/2025 May 6. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility, India, and Chhattisgarh. Shellwood (talk) 10:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The page creator has added three sources, but these sources only briefly mention the individual in specific contexts (cheetah extinction and princely state merger) without providing significant coverage of the person’s life, achievements, or background. Therefore, the article does not meet WP:GNG (lacking significant coverage in reliable, independent sources) or WP:BLP (no in-depth, verifiable information for a biography). SachinSwami (talk) 10:58, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Not the best quality, but I think sources present indicate he is notable beyond WP:1E as the ruler of a princely state (arguably an WP:NPOL pass), a participant in the Round Table Conferences, the independence kerfuffle, and the hunting. The Lallantop is currently doing a lot of heavy lifting, but I think there is enough here to surpass WP:NOPAGE. Additionally, I did a cursory search on GBooks specifically excluding the word "cheetah" and found a number of supplementary primary sources which can additionally be used for basic facts to fill in some of the holes. Also, WP:BLP only applies for living or recently deceased people, so does not matter here. Curbon7 (talk) 11:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
More sources likely to exist in Hindi; is there a translation of his name? Curbon7 (talk) 11:29, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to have figured out that his final name "Deo" can also be translated as "Dev" or "Deva". Searching that pointed me towards this page from the "Directorate of Culture and Archaeology of the Government of Chhattisgarh", which includes his background and stuff he did as ruler (education reforms, etc.). Pulling from the Lallantop article, his name in Hindi seems to be रामानुज प्रताप सिंह देव ; I cannot read Hindi so cannot search for sources in that language very well. Curbon7 (talk) 11:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This seems to be a retaliatory nomination, made after I favoured the deletion of the रामचन्द्र विद्यार्थी article on hiwiki, an article where nominator was actively trying to retain. Chronos.Zx (talk) 11:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ramanuj Pratap Singh Deo was the King of Korea State and clearly meets notability criteria. A simple search on Google Books, Internet Archive, and general web search returns multiple reliable references about him. It appears the nominator did not follow WP:BEFORE, a basic check before AfD nom. Chronos.Zx (talk) 11:58, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I want to clarify that I am not engaging in revenge nomination.
The first page was not created by me; I only contributed to it. However, I did not insist on keeping it or create any dispute there, and I even replied that it could be deleted if needed, which should have been mentioned here. Additionally, there was another comment in support of keeping that page, but you are making false accusations against me.
Most importantly, I have made contributions over the past month, and if you wish to bring all of them to AfD for deletion, you may do so as per Wikipedia policies—I will absolutely not participate in supporting them. Make all efforts as you see fit; I have neither any benefit nor loss from this. I have only brought this to AfD as per Wikipedia guidelines.
I will also leave Wikipedia and will request to vanish tomorrow. SachinSwami (talk) 14:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have requested to vanish SachinSwami (talk) 14:18, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SachinSwami My heartfelt apologies, brother, if my words hurt you in any way. Chronos.Zx (talk) 15:57, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SachinSwami I've Strikethrough above comment. Chronos.Zx (talk) 16:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per @Curbon7. Well reasoned argument and good research. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 12:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Rulers of Indian princely states clearly satisfy WP:POLITICIAN. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WoodenStreet

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

The article reads overly promotional and borders on G11. It needs a complete rewrite for neutral tone, but only if notability is established. When discounting routine business coverage such as press releases, funding announcements, and store opening updates, there is virtually no significant, in-depth coverage from reliable, independent secondary sources. Some cited success stories and profiles appear to be from dubious sources. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 07:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Rajasthan. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 07:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DeepSource

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

This company does not meet the notability guideline for corporations. The only coverage of this corporation is from trade publications. The existing sources are either unreliable (Forbes) or routine coverage (TechCrunch). voorts (talk/contributions) 21:22, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Technology, Computing, India, and California. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:22, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - sources listed do not appear to assert notability, with one (Fortune India) using some questionable language ("revolutionary", "uber-cool"). The other two that appear to have some depth (Devops and TheNewStack) seem to be centered on their product "globstar" and not the company itself. As usual, I ignored the sources we already have flagged as potentially unreliable (which were already mentioned by the nom) I haven't found any better sources in my search.ASUKITE 21:31, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:54, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The Forbes India article is a company profile. The Fortune India piece appears under the Fortune India Exchange, which is likely a sponsored feature. Other available articles mostly follow a promotional, SEO-driven format. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 06:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in addition to above mentions, finding a handful of the citations are just passing mentions. or even primary sources.Villkomoses (talk) 13:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Circular economy in the Indian textile industry

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

essay like treatment and poorly sourced version of another article already sent to WP:AFD Theroadislong (talk) 20:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and India. Theroadislong (talk) 20:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:22, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Part of a set of articles created, moved to strange places, nominated for deletion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plastic Weaving Art), speedily deleted and so forth. The creating editor seems to be trying to make a point rather than argue their case. WP:POINT may well apply. Duplicates Plastic Weaving Art] in spirit if not in words. Could well be CSD A10. As with PWA I see WP:ESSAY and WP:ADMASQ, together with a paucity of correct referencing. I doubt WP:GNG. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 21:22, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - for the same reasons as Plastic Weaving Art. Seems to be a series of articles that are designed to promote the textile industry of India, almost like a social media marketing campaign which may or may not involve COI/UPE. The history of moving of these related articles is quite odd, and the series is beginning to look like the start of a walled garden. Nevertheless, the article reads like both an essay and as a veiled advertisement for the industry as mentioned above in Theroadislog's nomination and by Timtrent. The sourcing looks like standard PR, not serious journalism, and I'm finding that most of the sources are dead 404 links. Interestingly, When I ran it through ZeroGPT, the analysis was that the body of the article was 99.53% generated by Artificial Intelligence. The lead section seemed to be written by a human. (Note that there are now AI programs that will "humanize" AI-written text.) Between failing WP:GNG, and the other problems, it's best to delete this PROMO. Netherzone (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the vote above. Best,GPL93 (talk) 17:59, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FlowerAura

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

Page was speedily deleted on May 2 and subsequently recreated. I again tagged for deletion, which was declined by Bbb23. As for the actual article, sources are all promotional fluff, interviews, or flat-out press releases copies. It would need a fundamental rewrite and much better sourcing. JTtheOG (talk) 18:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and India. JTtheOG (talk) 18:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:36, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Haryana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:36, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:39, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plastic Weaving Art

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

Disputed draftification. WP:DRAFTOBJECT prevents unilateral return to Draft, however, in view of the creating editor appearing unwilling to take the advice of reviewers, I feel deletion to be the correct route. As part of my rationale I quote the latest reviewer, Theroadislong: "still entirely inappropriate tone and unclear what the sources are supporting as they are not inline...see WP:REFB". I see WP:ESSAY and WP:ADMASQ, together with a paucity of correct referencing. I doubt WP:GNG. I cannot spot it. The term is not a neologism per se, but this appears to be a 'new thing' not (yet) having notability. The odd reference scheme means ity is a WP:V failure 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 18:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Visual arts, Economics, and India. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 18:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This article reads like an advertisement for the plastic weaving industry in the city of Dharavi. However the weaving of plastic has taken place around the world for practical applications for example clothing from synthetic fibers, Kevlar for armor, industrial upholstery, artists works, etc. It's not a new thing, it's just not something that happens solely in Dharavi. The sources are not verifiable that the plastic weaving industry in Dharavi is particularly notable enough to distinguish it from other 100s of other places around the globe. I agree that this seems like both an essay, but even more so like an advertisement or promo. Netherzone (talk) 20:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Netherzone. Both promotional and has essay concerns. Best, GPL93 (talk) 03:55, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. reads like an essay and sounds promotional. It contains unlinked references and likely includes original research.Chanel Dsouza (talk) 06:45, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circular economy in the Indian textile industry for an essentially similar article. The edit history of that one speaks for itself 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 07:25, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2019 Indian general strike

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

Labour strike that fails WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE. No coverage beyond 2019. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and India. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
keep Many sources called it "biggest strike in history". 200M strikers no joke. Yes there is coverage beyond 2009, e.g, this 2021 book. --Altenmann >talk 18:32, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Obvious sustained coverage. It has been covered in books or journals several times after 2019, for example, 2020 [4][5] and 2024 [6]. And if you can bother checking, there's a lot more hits in Google Scholar and Google Books. MarioGom (talk) 06:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shukla Sadan

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

Non-notable film. Mekomo (talk) 14:54, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 15:14, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article has been moved to draftspace before (see Draft:Shukla Sadan and Draft:Draft:Shukla Sadan) and seems to be SELFPROMO (see User:SS (actor)) REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 16:30, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article is poorly written and badly formatted. It lacks adequate independent sources to establish notability.Chanel Dsouza (talk) 06:37, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Immediate deletion of this page should be done. very badly drafted page and also non-notable profile.Almandavi (talk) 07:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The poor writing and formatting are additional concerns, but the primary issue is the absence of sufficient independent sources to establish significant coverage.

Afstromen (talk) 07:28, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Punjab FC records and statistics

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

Per WP:NOTSTATS. The particular content can be found at Punjab FC#Records and statistics. Wareon (talk) 09:50, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Lists, and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Club is far too young to need this WP:CONTENTFORK. Govvy (talk) 10:07, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Punjab-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:05, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – As WP:ATD. I'm not against this type of page, but there's still little material to be worked on. Svartner (talk) 12:07, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:15, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Punjab FC#Records and statistics - does not need a separate article. Giant Snowman 18:28, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Punjab FC#Records and statistics per above.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:25, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St+art India Foundation

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

The foundation does not meet WP:NORG. References 1 and 3 are not independent, and Reference 2 is about the founder's passing. Online searches return only trivial mentions with no in-depth, independent coverage. Junbeesh (talk) 07:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Organizations, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:31, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. Delete as per nomination. Fails WP:GNG and not found any WP:RS. Misopatam (talk | contribs) 07:46, 3 May 2025 (UTC) - WP:SOCKSTRIKE ~SG 5536B 23:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete sources do not demonstrate significant coverage. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 18:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unless better sourcing can be found (and posted here if possible). The only solid reliable source is Architectural Digest [7] but that's not enough to pass WP:NCORP or GNG. The article is written with a highly promotional tone, the sourcing seems like PR, and Google Arts & Culture should not be used as a citation (it's like asking AI to write an article about a subject). BTW, GPTzero and Grammerly detects that about 3/4 of the article itself was written by AI. Netherzone (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chandu Salimkumar

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

Non-notable actor. Fails WP:NACTOR. Ednabrenze (talk) 05:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. Ednabrenze (talk) 05:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:26, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:NACTOR. Only four films, the first of which is about himself. — Maile (talk) 13:28, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It's a non-notable actor, who only has Four Films Destinyokhiria (talk) 16:35, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NACTOR – ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 08:34, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. actor may not have an extensive body of work, but he played a prominent role in his debut film Manjummel Boys, as noted in a review Pinkvilla review. According to Mathrubhumi, he also had a main role in the film Painkili. I need to research more before I can say anything for sure.Chanel Dsouza (talk) 06:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this personality may have done notable work but lacks proper news sources to establish work. Improvement could be done on the page.Almandavi (talk) 07:18, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:NACTOR. Played notable characters in multiple noted films.

Afstromen (talk) 07:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mumbai Regional Congress Committee

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

Fails WP:GNG, not a notable state unit of the Indian National Congress, as it is only a region within a state and has no legislative assembly having noteworthy state-level elections. Only the units of states and union territories having legislative assemblies are notable enough to have their own articles. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 03:47, 3 May 2025 (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/2025 May 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:13, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ladakh Territorial Congress Committee

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

Fails WP:GNG, not a notable state unit of the Indian National Congress, as it is only a territory and has no legislative assembly having noteworthy state-level elections. Only the units of states and union territories having legislative assemblies are notable enough to have their own articles. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 03:41, 3 May 2025 (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/2025 May 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:03, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ladakh-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andaman and Nicobar Territorial Congress Committee

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

Fails WP:GNG, not a notable state unit of the Indian National Congress, as it is only a territory and has no legislative assembly having noteworthy state-level elections. Only the units of states and union territories having legislative assemblies are notable enough to have their own articles. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 03:44, 3 May 2025 (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/2025 May 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:03, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:09, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:09, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chandigarh Territorial Congress Committee

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Chandigarh Territorial Congress Committee

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

Fails WP:GNG, not a notable state unit of the Indian National Congress, as it is only a territory and has no legislative assembly having noteworthy state-level elections. Only the units of states and union territories having legislative assemblies are notable enough to have their own articles. I am also nominating the following related pages because [of same reason as above]:

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:45, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lakshadweep Territorial Congress Committee

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Lakshadweep Territorial Congress Committee

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

Fails WP:GNG, not a notable state unit of the Indian National Congress, as it is only a territory and has no legislative assembly having noteworthy state-level elections. Only the units of states and union territories having legislative assemblies are notable enough to have their own articles. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 03:30, 3 May 2025 (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/2025 May 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:46, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:01, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:01, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sadanand Dhume

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG. Absolutiva (talk) 21:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, India, and Washington, D.C.. Shellwood (talk) 22:23, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural keep. This was closed as keep 2 months ago. WP:6MONTHS suggests:If the XfD discussion was closed as “keep”, generally do not renominate the page for at least six months, unless there is something new to say, and even so, usually wait a few months. Astaire (talk) 23:03, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - and consider the same for his travel narrative My Friend the Fanatic. What does his atheism have to do with anything? Who cares? I didn't learn anything from his article except that he has made a public statement that agrees with Donald Trump in relocating all the Palestinians. — Maile (talk) 00:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This feels like a WP:IDONTLIKEIT vote Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:24, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep survived deletion discussion in feb. @Astaire says it better. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:25, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Astaire. Rusalkii (talk) 02:29, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, same rationale as my !vote in the last AfD. Passes WP:NAUTHOR as the author of a significant or well-known work that has been the subject of multiple reviews. MCE89 (talk) 16:39, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:NAUTHOR as well as * Procedural keep.* Rahmatula786 (talk) 14:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pujniya Raseshwari Devi

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

Her only notable work is "involvement in the idol installation ceremonies" of some temples. Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources and fails wp:GNG / wp:ANYBIO. Zuck28 (talk) 19:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Religion, Hinduism, India, Chhattisgarh, and Odisha. Zuck28 (talk) 19:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Balvinder Singh Suri

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

No significant coverage in secondary reliable sources. Badly sourced. Possible COI. Zuck28 (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. Zuck28 (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: - it depends on whether you consider his role in Taarak Mehta Ka Ooltah Chashmah significant enough to make him pass WP:NACTOR or have significant coverage of the same. Bearian (talk) 21:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; noted roles in notable projects. I have attached three new news sources, and more are available on Google.

Afstromen (talk) 08:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Raman Kumar

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

Lack of Wp:SIGCOV in secondary sources. Zuck28 (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India, Maharashtra, and Punjab. Zuck28 (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Best I can find is this. And, that is more of him giving his opinion as opposed to a journalist writing about him. There is also a claim on the page that Tara (2013 film) is "considered one of the leading shows in Indian television history" except it has no Wikipedia page and I cannot find a source to support.--CNMall41 (talk) 16:52, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:41, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can not see any reliable source to meet subject's notability. Film's roles are also not big. Almandavi (talk) 05:28, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 13:03, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This person is not sufficiently notable. The RSes seem to be sparse and it fails WP:SIGCOV Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 16:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:SUSTAINED. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 16:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There's a basic verification problem here. Bearian (talk) 21:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nomination Falls WP:SIGCOV. Sync! (talk)

Venugopal Reddy. I

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

Not notable pediatrician who claims to be a researcher and author, with an h-factor of 2 so claims are unverified. No indication of any significant coverage in reputable sources, no major peer awards and those in the article look highly dubious. After draftification an editor removed comments and moved it back to main, hence time for AfD. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Medicine, and India. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:02, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per nomination. Fails wp:GNG and wp:SIGCOV. Zuck28 (talk) 18:55, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Recreation of previously deleted Venugopal Reddy Iragamreddy. Which was created by a blocked user in violation of a block. Zuck28 (talk) 21:12, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No pass of of NPROF, I didn't find reviews for NAUTHOR (albeit in a somewhat cursory search), no other notability apparent. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clearly a non-notable profile, also previously deleted.--Almandavi (talk) 05:54, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --hroest 15:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - very low profile and citations. Bearian (talk) 21:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nomination Fails WP:GNG 𝒮𝓎𝓃𝒸-!⃝

Akash Singh Rajput

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

The subject fails WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Acting roles are minor—brief appearances in Toilet: Ek Prem Katha, Mirzapur, and Aashram and do not meet WP:NACTOR. The "world record" lacks notability, and relation to a politician is irrelevant. Most sources, like ANI press releases and Nai Dunia, are unreliable or do not mention the subject. The article also shows WP:COI issues and feels like WP:TOOSOON.

The article's credibility is further undermined by the page creator uploading an image with false copyright claims, which was deleted twice for violations despite being claimed as their own work. Zuck28 (talk) 15:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Politicians, Music, India, Madhya Pradesh, and Maharashtra. Zuck28 (talk) 15:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Page meets the both criteria.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 16:35, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Subject's acting roles are minor and insignificant.
The claimed "world record" for a book is not a notable award, and being the son of a politician does not confer notability, as it is not inherited per Wikipedia standards.
The article relies heavily on unreliable or inadequate sources:
- Source #2 (ANI press release) is self-published.
- Source #3 (Nai Dunia) is non-reliable.
- Source #5 is a forum, not a credible source.
- Source #7 is non-reliable.
- Source #8 does not mention the subject.
- Source #9 is a duplicate.
- Source #10 and Source #11 do not mention the subject.
Most remaining sources fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA, which typically lack the depth required for significant coverage.
Zuck28 (talk) 18:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear, Significant sources are available.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 02:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This page meet the criteria under both WP:GNG and the WP:NACTOR. The article is supported by many significant coverage.
Delete As per nominator, subject does not meet WP:GNG. Filmibeat, Naidunia, IndiaForums, OneIndia, MPBreaking are not reliable. Almandavi (talk) 05:27, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think you need to be more careful when editing Wikipedia. It’s unacceptable that you fail to recognize one of the top media portals like OneIndia. Your edits seem really suspicious to me. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:21, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OneIndia is listed as unreliable here per WP:ICTFSOURCES Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:30, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Understood! kindly review more listed sources, as there are many reliable available including TOI, NDTV, and The Print etc. Additionally, his father Govind Singh Rajput is also a Cabinet Minister. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:52, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@S-Aura Being someone's son doesn't makes the personality notable for wikipedia. Almandavi (talk) 07:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Almandavi, The context was different. I hope you will understand as you start editing. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:03, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Miminity for clearing it. @S-Aura Better to research and fix rather than pointing other editors. Almandavi (talk) 07:13, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Almandavi, Thanks for your advice! 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:GNG, as multiple reliable sources have been found.Sync! (talk)

Progressive Students Union

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

Non-notable organisation. No reliable sources. Fails WP:N and would seem unlikely to ever meet it. Cabrils (talk) 07:04, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:38, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - PSU, previously AIPSU, is active since 1950s, and has played a significant role in student politics in Kerala, West Bengal and, to some extent, Tripura. But it's an organization that is now well past its heydays, and its online footprint isn't great. I note this "RSP did not fail to cast its net wide enough to reach the student community . Its student wing is called PSU or Progressive Students ' Union . In pre - partition days , RSP student leaders who worked hand in hand with the All India Students Congress , took part in the struggles against the British Raj . They joined demonstrations for the release of INA prisoners , observed Rashid Ali Day , and campaigned against communal riots . But they had no alliance with the student cadres of the CPI . In post - independence period , All Bengal Students Congress adopted a policy of all out support to the Congress Govt . and the RSP found it increasingly difficult to support this rightwing leadership . Hence in 1956 , the PSU came into existence . The students belonging to the PSU upheld the cause of universal education , democratic management of schools and colleges , more budgetary allocation of funds for education etc. The PSU sent volunteers for the liberation of Goa , organised relief squads for the refugees , protested against the increase in school fees and undemocratic Bill for the Board of secondary Education . Sourindra Nath Bhattacharya , Bijan Biswas , Prof. Buddhadeb Bhattacharya were prominent student leaders of the RSP . Banin Ray , Kshiti Goswami were also in the limelight for many years . But the PSU was never considered a very strong force in West Bengal student movement ." (Marxist Parties of West Bengal in Opposition and in Government, 1947-2001 (p. 88))

Another ref is [https://ia601504.us.archive.org/4/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.131364/2015.131364.The-Politics-Of-Scarcity_text.pdf The Politics of Scarcity (p. 181) by Myron Weiner "Two other student movements claim national coverage, the Progressive Students Union, sponsored by the Marxist-left, and the Socialist-sponsored Socialist Student Organization. The PSU was started in 1954 and claims thousands of members in Calcutta and tens of thousands nationally. Like members of the Youth Congress and AISF, they arc active in attempting to gain control of the various college unions, and have succeeded in a few of the Calcutta colleges. They participated in the 1954 teachers’ movement for higher wages, sent volunteers to the Goa satyagraha campaign, and agitated against the attempt to merge the states of Bihar and West Bengal. In 1955 the PSU agitated against raising tuition fees, and in 1957 they participated in the protest against high food prices. The PSU is strongest in Calcutta, as arc the other student groups in Bengal, and is less active in the rural schools and colleges. Its most active workers, like those of the Marxist-left parties that give it support, have come from East Bengal."

I'd argue this is a case of WP:NEXIST, where it is clear that if we had access to regional print media from Kerala and Bengal from 1950s, 1960s, 1970s etc we'd have plenty of material to use as source. We do find some proxies of this online, such as [8], [9] The Telegraph (on conflict at a college in WB), The Telegraph (report on a 2 day district conf attended by state minister), [https://www.telegraphindia.com/west-bengal/rsp-sets-terms-for-election-alliance/cid/842288, a school gherao (2005). On participation is Bengal refugee movement, The Marginal Men: The Refugees and the Left Political Syndrome in West Bengal (p. 383). Per non-WP:RS source AIPSU won 1969 student elections in West Bengal in 5 colleges. AIPSU also produced many of the RSP national leaders, such as T. J. Chandrachoodan and Kshiti Goswami. --Soman (talk) 10:44, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - 2025 article in Ananda Bazar Patrika on the 23rd West Bengal PSU conference. 2022 article in Ananda Bazar Patrika on election of new West Bengal leadership of PSU. --Soman (talk) 10:54, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bengali Tiger Force

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

In-depth and reasonable sources are not here, please add such information or the article will be removed, heck add even one in-depth reference that was published by a trusted newspaper or channel that is recognised either locally or in national levels, no problem, just add it, WP:GNG should be read. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 10:53, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Organizations, Asia, India, and Assam. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 10:53, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is all right. In the 1900s, there weren't really any online newspapers in that region that regularly published news. However, if needed, a book can be quoted. Somajyoti ✉ 11:11, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I know but couldn't it be mentioned later, please find a book that mentions it then. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 12:43, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I searched and couldn't find any, i only found this which is not enough and not even available anymore! If you found any book or source that is in-depth, please add it. Macarius Ibne Mito (talk) 03:40, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Insufficient coverage by independent, reliable secondary sources to pass WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:39, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Ahammed Saad (talk) 17:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2018 Bengali teacher recruitment movement

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

It is not a significant event, unlike other movements, this is not as significant and also similar protests happen every day, check West Bengali and East Bengali (Bangladeshi) newspapers and read them, such events happen everyday but not every movement deserves a article unless the movement is significant and remembered even after one month of the protest/riot/movement/uprising. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 10:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, India, and West Bengal. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 10:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The nominator has failed to make a case why the sourcing situation is insufficient. Cortador (talk) 11:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ - Show me how this is relevant and enough for a article. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 12:14, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Each and every sentence here is supported by a reliable source. 14 sources are enough for this short article. Somajyoti ✉ 12:18, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Explain properly how It's enough for a separate article, similar movements have occurred every day with even 40 sources and news channels mentioning them, what matters is relevance and then notability, check 2018 Bangladesh quota reform movement, it left a result and impact, did this movement leave a similar impact? Regular clashes and movements against type of teachers have also occurred 30 times in Bangladesh in only November 2024, give a proper explanation. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 12:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is undoubtedly a notable and meaningful event. Protests like this don’t happen every day. Incidents like this don’t occur daily in West Bengal. If they do happen and newspapers report them-that is, they can be cited from reliable sources-then separate articles will certainly be created from them. Here, the deaths of two people and mentions of many others being injured are included and for this short article, fourteen sources have been cited which is sufficient. If other editors add more text to the article, then they will surely add more sources as well. Somajyoti ✉ 12:27, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, they do, in such a massive area with previous incidents of unrest, protests can occur, please say how this left a impact, then I will be convinced after you show its impact and relevance. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 12:37, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:Vandalism Somajyoti ✉ 20:29, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police, Politics, and Education. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:50, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's difficult to fully ascertain whether this had a lasting impact in Bangladesh as I don't speak the language. That said, the articles cited and machine translated articles seem to point to in-depth coverage. Per WP:PRESERVE, this article should be kept and improved. @User:Somajyoti a more descriptive may be helpful for english wikipedia's audience which is likely not too familiar with protests in Bangladesh. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 22:08, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This was in West Bengal, not Bangladesh, can you translate the sources? Plus if anyone shows how this movement was impactful, please say, I'll be convinced. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 10:55, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Somajyoti passes WP:GNG.Major event in West Bengal.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:24, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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!} 23:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2028 West Bengal Panchayat elections

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

WP:TOOSOON, no sources seem to focus on the election specifically. Could be re-created once election gets coverage later on Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:02, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, India, and West Bengal. Shellwood (talk) 16:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's not only too soon, but "it's" typos are too many to fix. Bearian (talk) 08:00, 5 May 2025 (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!} 23:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2027 West Bengal Municipal election

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

WP:TOOSOON, nothing I can find covers this. Was previously moved to draft Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:13, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, India, and West Bengal. Shellwood (talk) 16:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Too soon and no reliable, significant coverage of the future election available. Good candidate for WP:PROD. Not sure why there would be a section about voter turnout in an election that is 2 years away. WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL. @Yoblyblob I think these types of pages are good candidates for WP:PROD or WP:MULTIAFD so AfD doesn't get too cluttered.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 00:07, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anonrfjwhuikdzz I will tag these with PROD in the future Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 00:13, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: It is a clear case of WP:TOOSOON. B-Factor (talk) 06:19, 7 May 2025 (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!} 23:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2027 Siliguri Municipal Corporation election

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

Case of WP:TOOSOON, no coverage about the actual election Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:13, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, India, and West Bengal. Shellwood (talk) 16:40, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete agree this is too soon and I can't find any reliable coverage about the election. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 00:01, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is a clear case of WP:TOOSOON. B-Factor (talk) 06:18, 7 May 2025 (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.

Meher Pudumjee

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

A promotional biography of a businesswoman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. Just a detailed resume WP:NOTRESUME. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Maharashtra. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the subject has won several made up in one day awards for up and coming but run of the mill business person. See also WP:SPAM and WP:NOTFB. Bearian (talk) 08:37, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Insufficient independent significant coverage. Very promotional.Forbes has hundreds of people on its lists each year and a lot of them don't have articles. Being on the list alone doesn't mean you're inherently notable. Per WP:NEWSORGINDIA there are concerns about Indian sources providing paid/sponsored coverage which is in line with the tone of this article. She after all is the daughter of one of India's richest tycoons. - Imcdc Contact 00:56, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I can see some substantial coverage that meets Wikipedia's notability standard WP:GNG. Here is the In-depth coverage: Forbes, Business Standrad, DNA India, India Today, and potentially additional information can be discovered with a Google search. B-Factor (talk) 06:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@B-Factor The 3 Indian news sources are questionable at best due to the high possibility of undisclosed sponsored reporting, especially in reporting people of borderline notability.

Forbes is a reliable source but I'm not sure if that blurb will be enough to pass WP:SIGCOV. It doesn't talk about her personal life at all. ApexParagon (talk) 14:41, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete for now. When there is more coverage, can build the page again. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 19:38, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thermax

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources, whether on or off Wikipedia, should be viewed with caution, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. Apart from that, activities like announcing annual/quarterly results, joint ventures, capacity expansion news etc., are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:04, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Maharashtra. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:04, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, but also because it's so poorly written as to be indecipherable. Bearian (talk) 08:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient WP:ORGCRITE sources.- Imcdc Contact 01:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is an easy WP:NCORP pass as I can see adequate analyst coverage [10] [11] [12] and significant media coverage [13] [14] [15]. Large publicly traded corporations are generally considered notable, yet the nominator continues to send such articles to AfD, seemingly without conducting WP:BEFORE checks. Yuvaank (talk) 01:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@CharlieMehta I noticed you are experienced in checking the independence of analyst reports. Can I please request you perform a check for this? Imcdc Contact 01:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, Sure... I need a bit of time for this. But, won’t be voting in this AfD due to WP:CANVASS. Charlie (talk) 04:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Checking the independence of analysts reports (shared by Yuvaank) as per the Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#We_Need_to_Revisit_WP:LISTED_Rules_for_Indian_Listed_Companies. Please be aware that the RSN discussion is not yet concluded.

1. Report by HDFC Securities - There is a disclaimer on slide number 11, which clearly states the following; "HSL or its associates might have received any compensation from the companies mentioned in the report during the period preceding twelve months from t date of this report for services in respect of managing or co-managing public offerings, corporate finance, investment banking or merchant banking, brokerage services or other advisory service in a merger or specific transaction in the normal course of business."

2. Report by YES Securities - The disclaimer on page number 11 explicitly states the following: "Since YSL and its associates are engaged in various businesses in the financial services industry, they may have financial interest or may have received compensation for investment banking or merchant banking or brokerage services or for any other product or services of whatsoever nature from the subject company(ies) in the past twelve months or associates of YSL may have managed or co-managed public offering of securities in the past twelve months of the subject company(ies) whose securities are discussed herein." and "Associates of YSL may have actual/beneficial ownership of 1% or more and/or other material conflict of interest in the securities discussed herein."

3. Report by PL Capital - At page number 8, in the Disclaimer section (Indian clients), we can find the following texts; "PL may from time to time solicit or perform investment banking or other services for any company mentioned in this document." and "PL or its associates might have received compensation from the subject company in the past twelve months."

These disclaimers are printed in a very small fonts in most cases, and we only noticed them recently because of Senco Gold's AfD. It's apparent that such 'analyst' reports don't qualify as reliable under WP:IS. Charlie (talk) 05:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CharlieMehta Thank you for your analysis. Imcdc Contact 10:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. asilvering (talk) 01:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fetch.AI

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

Article has no sources and previous content was filled with non RS and self published sources and was partially written by someone who was paid for it.

As it currently stands, the article would need to be blanked in order to meet verifiability standards. Laura240406 (talk) 09:43, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can also see that similar articles about the company and CEO have been deleted on the simple Wikipedia:

simple:User_talk:桑斯春德 simple:User talk:Namaste8907

The site has also been deleted over there. Laura240406 (talk) 10:01, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Websites, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I also cannot find any reliable sources. Most are self-published or come from crypto sites, though I'm not sure if that fetch.ai is the same as this company. I don't think fetch is going to happen here.
Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 11:11, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per @Anonrfjwhuikdzz Sanemero the Robot Prince (not really, it's a Gloryhammer reference) 16:52, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~:Keep - This Page has highjacked, now I have reverted to to normal.~~

~~Kindly removed the deletion now User:Laura240406.~~

~~Kinldy check Fetch.AI . U678 (talk) 06:42, 3 May 2025 (UTC)~~(

Blocked sockpuppet) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:27, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Lacking secondary sources. Brandon (talk) 07:01, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the article was hijacked as stated by U678 and the old one seems "good enough" (has secondary sources) Laura240406 (talk) 08:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nothing notable here per WP:NCORP except some puff pieces. --hroest 15:36, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain - The problem with blockchains/crypto project articles on Wikipedia is that most sources of crypto information are not allowed for RS despite that many of them are credible and factually-correct. This blanket ban over all crypto news sites and the exclusion of primary sources (specifically developer documentation) is the main bottleneck into providing accurate information on blockchains and crypto projects. Without them, it's extremely difficult to fill in any information at all for any crypto project. That being said, Fetch is somewhat of an exception because most news sites have provided very inaccurate information on Fetch.ai because they are based on Fetch.ai's marketing blogs and publications instead of on documentation. As usual, the most accurate source of crypto project information is not marketing or news but developer documentation. HSukePup (talk) 17:00, 7 May 2025 (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.

Kushal N. Desai

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

A promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. Just a detailed resume WP:NOTRESUME. Also, simply being the grandson of an industrialist doesn't justify having a Wikipedia page. Notability cannot be inherited. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Gujarat. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If User:DGG were alive, he'd probably assume notability, but the consensus is that co-owning a billion-dollar company inherited from grandfather is not automatically inherently notable by inheritance. I'm not against a reasonable redirect. Bearian (talk) 09:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Insufficient independent significant coverage. Quite promotional.Notability is not determined by how rich one is. Per WP:NEWSORGINDIA there are concerns about Indian sources providing paid/sponsored coverage which would apply here given he is a billionaire. Pretty in line with the article's tone.- Imcdc Contact 01:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Promotional tone has been written out from the article and there are good independent sources also.The subject is a billionaire and there is enough significant coverage available about him in credible sources like Business Today, Fortune India, Forbes, and online also. He was listed among the top Indian billionaire[16]. The Hurun India Rich List, Fortune India, and Waterfield Advisors are all notable recognitions. The Subject clearly passes WP:NBASIC.Lobbymaster (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC) Note: This user is creator of the article[reply]
Keep: From reading the sources, the individual seems to have received significant coverage in reliable media publications like Fortune India and Business Today, which are not trivial and satisfy WP:NBASIC. Monhiroe (talk) 08:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 14:02, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhijit Guha (anthropologist)

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

The article is filled with Self published links, Nothing to establish notability. Fails WP:BASIC. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, India, and West Bengal. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep then Protect - I consider that the subject meets WP:NAUTHOR criterion 3:The person has created ... a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews - in the Selected publications section, the references are to reviews of his books. It is certainly true that the article is frequently subject to less well sourced additions from IP editors - who probably have a conflict of interest - which are reverted from time to time. I won't revert them during this AfD (and some of the additions may merit a place in Selected publications) but will once it's finished. If the article is kept, I suggest that it be placed under extended confirmed protection to help prevent these kind of additions from happening. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 07:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SunloungerFrog, Let's talk about the references. Please provide significant coverage about the subject. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion. 2405:201:900A:D036:A091:6C59:207C:BB20 (talk) 16:15, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is obvious because this is a biographical article.But these links can be verified whether they are genuine or not. See for example this biographical article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kewal_Krishan_(forensic_anthropologist)#cite_note-4

What's wrong in it? The point is whether the papers are genuine or not. 2405:201:900A:D036:A091:6C59:207C:BB20 (talk) 16:13, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the comments from the other editor, if you have not seen it already.

Keep then Protect - I consider that the subject meets WP:NAUTHOR criterion 3: The person has created ... a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews - in the Selected publications section, the references are to reviews of his books. It is certainly true that the article is frequently subject to less well sourced additions from IP editors - who probably have a conflict of interest - which are reverted from time to time. I won't revert them during this AfD (and some of the additions may merit a place in Selected publications) but will once it's finished. If the article is kept, I suggest that it be placed under extended confirmed protection to help prevent these kind of additions from happening. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 07:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC) 2405:201:900A:D036:A091:6C59:207C:BB20 (talk) 16:25, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please come forward after log-in your account then provide your factual statement. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 05:45, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NAUTHOR criteria 3. Looking only at the books in the "selected publications" section, there are reviews of Land, Law, and the Left: The Saga of Disempowerment of the Peasantry in the Era of Globalization in the journal International Sociology [17] and in The Statesman [18]; reviews of Tarak Chandra Das: The Unsung Hero of Indian Anthropology in The Eastern Anthropologist and Anthropological Forum [19]; reviews of Nation-building in Indian Anthropology: Beyond the Colonial Encounter in South Asian Anthropologist, Antrocom Journal of Anthropology and Man in India [20]; and reviews of Encountering Land Grab: An Ethnographic Journey in Indian Anthropologist and the Journal of the Indian Anthropological Society (many of which are already cited in the article). MCE89 (talk) 13:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All the above references provided by MCE89 are self published. We need in-depth coverage in reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. If you have such citations please provide, i would be more happy to withdrawn my nomination. Bakhtar40 (talk) 06:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? They’re clearly not self-published. All of the sources I linked above are book reviews in peer-reviewed academic journals (and one in a newspaper). Which is exactly what is required to pass WP:NAUTHOR. Can you explain what you mean by these sources being self-published? MCE89 (talk) 07:15, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the above analysis. Andre🚐 03:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Bakhtar40, I'm not sure what you are trying to get at. To add to MCE89's comment, and to expand on my keep rationale, I do not think that the subject can be considered notable under WP:GNG, for which at least three decent sources are necessary, as you say. However, I do think that the subject can be considered notable under the subject-specific notability guidelines for authors, which saysSuch a person is notable if:... The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.... In this case, the four books in Selected publications are thesignificant...body of work, and the references against each are theindependent peridiodical articles or reviews; MCE89 has also provided some additional reviews. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 07:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IdeaForge

AfDs for this article:

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources, whether on or off Wikipedia, should be viewed with caution, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. Apart from that, activities like revenue targets, profit/financial reporting, turnover news, capacity expansion news etc., are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. I am nominating this page for deletion again, as the last AfD ended without a consensus and took place over two months ago. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:41, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:39, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I came across several independent research reports like this, this and this, which critically and thoroughly cover the company. In addition to this, there is also significant critical coverage surrounding the IdeaForge drone fraud case, such as this and this. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 12:55, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chanel Dsouza I would like to respectfully point out that the PDF reports you shared from HEM Securities and HDFC Securities may not be entirely independent. Both documents include disclaimers on pages 6 and 17, respectively; which clearly indicate the presence of"potential or material conflicts of interest". Also, they mention that"the firms or their associates may have received compensation from the companies covered in the reports within the preceding twelve months". Indian securities reports should be viewed with some skepticism, something I realized during Senco Gold's AFD. These reports are often prepared for internal use within portfolio management services, where the firms typically hold shares in the subject companies or try to promote a particular narrative, especially around upcoming IPOs. Charlie (talk) 17:09, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I won’t vote in this deletion discussion because the nomination and my opinion are very similar to what I said in the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Apar_Industries. Charlie (talk) 17:25, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 17:36, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I cannot find coverage outside of routine business news updates that tend to be wire-style. I would agree that PDF reports from analysts are not reliable even if they are in depth as analysts often have a hidden agenda to convince people to pump or short stocks.Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 23:38, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Based on Charlie's analysis of Indian analyst reports lacking independence. Coverage mainly on bad conduct cannot be used to establish notability per WP:ILLCON.- Imcdc Contact 01:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

L Franchise (film series)

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

No significant coverage on sources as a film series; nor for a third film, which seems to be WP:CRYSTAL speculation at this point. Vestrian24Bio 10:01, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Vestrian24Bio 10:01, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom and WP:NFF. — Benison (Beni · talk) 11:03, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 11:16, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per above. -Samoht27 (talk) 19:40, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Franchise includes Lucifer (2019) and L2: Empuraan (2025), two of the highest-grossing Malayalam film series, with significant coverage in dependable sources. Meets WP:NFILM as well through substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources, such as reviews and box-office analyses for Lucifer and promotional coverage for L2: Empuraan in outlets like Times of India and Indian Express. WP:NFILM does not require a franchise to have a certain number of films to be notable. WP:CRYSTAL would only apply if the article includes unverified predictions or details about future developments. I guess you would argue the third film, L3: The Beginning. A source could be added about production information or a release date. Though, I'm still voting to keep this article. Editz2341231 (talk) 23:14, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The films are notable per WP:NFILM, but no source discusses the franchise in substantial coverage. Vestrian24Bio 04:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. Drmies (talk) 01:23, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miracle Foundation

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

Subject doesn't seem to be notable enough to warrant its own article. I feel like the subject isn't notable, and even if it was, it would likely be a case of WP:BLP1E. For example, the People and USA Today article are solid to establish notability, but with one catch - that's only about the founder starting the nonprofit. There's no sustained coverage aside from that. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, United States of America, Texas, and North America. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:53, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as has coverage like AJC D1 + AJC D6, The Monitor, Austin American-Statesman, Business World New Dehli. This coverage is significant and focuses on the organization. Nnev66 (talk) 14:08, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The Austin-American Statesman and The Monitor are local coverage which don't count towards WP:NGO. AJC D1+D6 are the same sources, but combined are not significant/very short and original research would be needed to write an article. The Business World New Delhi article reads like a press release - unless further sources are presented, the subject does not meet WP:NGO and WP:BLP1E still stands. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why doesn't Austin coverage count? Even if it didn't, there are other references that are not based in Austin like the Atlanta Journal Constitution and Business World New Dehli (linked above) which aren't yet in the article but count towards notability. Also, the Miracle Foundation is an international organization, not local to Austin. In addition, BLP1E doesn't apply here because Miracle Foundation is an organization, not a person. Nnev66 (talk) 22:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep BLP1E is for the individuals, not organizations. The coverage is also significant. Shankargb (talk) 22:29, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yes, Shankargb is correct that BLP1E is not applicable to organizations (BLP1E = biography of living person, one event). Regardless, the article was created and often edited by a single purpose account, and the sources are inadequate e.g. founder's hometown newspaper Austin-American Statesman is local coverage which is insufficient per WP:NGO. I don't know if Business World New Delhi is WP:RS for an NGO, especially not if it read like a press release. The organization was founded in 2000, yet there has been only passing mention of it in 25 years. I also agree with what WormEater13 said about the article needing an entire rewrite due to both inadequate sourcing AND the fact that it is in bad shape (sentence fragments, bad grammar, etc.) but that is an aside; it isn't sufficiently notable for inclusion.--FeralOink (talk) 13:40, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:45, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ~~Keep~~- changing my !vote to Delete after the excellent source analysis provided by Lamona, and the commentary by HighKing. meets GNG and NCORP per these fully independent, secondary reliable sources found in Newspapers.com (access required) that provide significant coverage over a period of years (over ten years of coverage!): [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], and more. Netherzone (talk) 16:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC) !vote changed from K to D. Netherzone (talk) 22:22, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here are the articles clipped so anyone can read them: 1+1b, 2, 3+3b, 4, 5, 6+6b, 7. All but the last one are significant coverage. Some of these are in the article about the founder. Nnev66 (talk) 17:45, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:WHYN statesWe require multiple sources so that we can write a reasonably balanced article that complies with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, rather than representing only one author's point of view. This is also why multiple publications by the same person or organization are considered to be a single source for the purpose of complying with the "multiple" requirement. So the Austin paper is to be viewed as a single source, and what is linked here, therefore, is one source. I also advise looking at the issue of sustained coverage at WP:SUSTAINED. Lamona (talk) 16:00, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't interpret a newspaper, magazine, or journal as an organization re: WP:WHYN. For the Austin American-Statesman articles, the first is from 2007 written by Flynn (2 above) which focuses on the founder and the origin story of the foundation. One could argue 2010 written by Barnes (6 & 6b above) covers similar information. However the article from 2017 written by Barnes (1 & 1b) is about the foundation president who was brought in to help the foundation show it was making progress by international standards, i.e. different content here. So there's a strong argument to count these as two sources with WP:SIGCOV, i.e. Flynn from 2007 and Barnes from 2017. The People article from 2015 and the Daily Press (Virginia) article by Stevens from 2017 (5 above) cover similar details from the Austin newspaper but are outside of Austin. The Christian Science Monitor article from 2015 initially focuses on the founder but gives more information about the foundation. There is also an article in the Atlanta Constitution from 2017 which gives some origin but also new information. There's also an article from the Monitor in 2020 (4 above, McAllen, TX is 300 miles away from Austin), Business World New Delhi in 2020, and KXAN in 2023 (Austin NBC station). So there are another seven references, in addition to the Austin American-Statesman ones, all total written from 2007-2023, re: WP:SUSTAINED. A new Miracle Foundation article could be written with all of the above, if there is consensus these sources meet WP:BASIC. Nnev66 (talk) 17:15, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It seems the article was created by a connected editor, who may or may not have been (or is) employed by the foundation (according to their user page). They never responded to the UPE warning on their user page. While I am strongly opposed to paid editing and discourage COI editing in general, any promo or NPOV remaining in the article can be cleaned up if it is kept. Having said that I still think the foundation is notable and the article on the founder, if deleted can be redirected to this article (if kept). Netherzone (talk) 19:23, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that the founder could be included in a page about the foundation although I think she has enough coverage to have a page of her own; merging content from her page to this one is a better option than deleting both. This article needs a complete re-write which I’m hesitant to do before AfD concludes. That would remove content contributed by the account which has a name suggesting a conflict of interest. Nnev66 (talk) 19:38, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've started a sources table because it's easier to absorb than links, and perhaps easier for discussion. It may be necessary to identify the different Austin-S articles. I'll add that in if I can. This list includes the sources in the article and the sources identified by Netherzone and Nnev66. Note that for sources I don't know to be reliable I have left a "?" but haven't looked them up in RS.

@Lamona this analysis seems to demonstrate that the founder meets notability, but on the Caroline Boudreaux page you say she doesn’t meet WP:BASIC. But regarding the foundation, it sounds like the ?s mean you are not sure. Also, you left out the Atlanta Constitution, Christian Science Monitor, and Business World New Delhi references from your analysis. Nnev66 (talk) 11:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources are in her article, not this one. I'm not, however, assuming from this that the article about Beaudreaux should be kept. It would be good to do a similar analysis there. I will do that, because I think it helps us see the big picture. Also, note that this is my analysis and others may have more or different information, so that's worth discussing. Lamona (talk) 15:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only the Christian Science Monitor reference is in the Boudreaux article. Business World New Delhi is primarily about the foundation and the Atlanta Constitution reference covers both - these aren’t in either article. But given the discussions in both AfD’s I’d encourage us, as Netherzone has, to consider a single article about Miracle Foundation with a section for the founder. While many sources discuss both, taken in total they provide significant coverage. The best argument I’ve read for keeping the Miracle Foundation page is that the founder is mostly notable for it and nothing else and there is quite a bit of information about the foundation from 2007-2023. Nnev66 (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I just was discovering that while editing. I'll fix. Lamona (talk) 16:21, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've replaced the table. If I've missed anything feel free to add it. Lamona (talk) 16:13, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't get to the New Delhi one through my library - is there a way through the WP library? I can't find it. Thanks. Lamona (talk) 16:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’re extended confirmed so should be able to access Proquest via the Wikipedia Library: https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/ Nnev66 (talk) 17:05, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Lamona, Nnev66, no need, this is a word-for-word copy of the Business World New Delhi article. Same can be found here. Obviously therefore the content is not "independent" - fails WP:ORGIND.

Delete First off, this article is about an organisation therefore WP:NCORP criteria requires in-depth "independent content" about the *organization* specifically. There's some discussion above about whether the founder is notable and that perhaps a merged article with merged sources can meet the criteria for one or both - that is not how the criteria are applied, one topic cannot "inherit" notability from another. I've looked at all of the articles mentioned above - the table above should really point to WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND since these are the parts of the NCORP guidelines the articles above fail. HighKing⁺⁺19:54, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I change SIGCOV to ORGDEPTH - I think that change makes sense. Lamona (talk) 00:06, 7 May 2025 (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.

Proposed deletions

Koshur Anchar (via WP:PROD on 22 March 2025)

Files for deletion

Category discussion debates

Template discussion debates

Redirects for deletion

MFD discussion debates

Other deletion discussions

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 January 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:16, 16 January 2023 (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/2023 January 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:31, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]