Jump to content
Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Points of interest related to India on Wikipedia:
Outline – History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – Style – To-do
Deletion Sorting
Project

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

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

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

Purge page cache watch

India

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

Article seems to be entirely promotional. Fails WP:PROMO. JekyllTheFabulous (talk) 10:09, 15 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:28, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Indrani - Epic 1- Dharam vs Karam (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Has no reliable reviews, [1] is not reliable per the Indian Cinema Taskforce. The film attempts to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability_(films)#Inclusionary_criteria #1 as the "The first Indian superwoman film", but there is absolutely no content to write an article about it.

The film's title is just Indrani and the rest shoulnd't be included per WP:TAGLINE. DareshMohan (talk) 21:15, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I20 (film) (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

No reliable reviews, all sources are relating to promotional events and OTT release. Sources found in WP:BEFORE: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]. Only review found was this, which has a dubious reliability [9]. DareshMohan (talk) 21:03, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

And @DareshMohan, thanks a lot for linking the findings of your BEFORE. That's very helpful. -Mushy Yank. 22:53, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Neerukulla 35km (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Needs 2 reliable reviews; it has only one. Has no other reliable sources either. Hesitant to redirect to draft despite being new since article creator has a history of moving drafts back to articlespace.

Technically, the film's title probably refers to a road marker indicating 35 km to Neerukulla, a village in Hanamkonda district. Can redirect to the district's article. DareshMohan (talk) 20:12, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I am not really in favour of redirecting it to the district, though. -Mushy Yank. 21:33, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Vijayant Thapar (officer) (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Repost of previously deleted and salted material: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vijayant Thapar * Pppery * it has begun... 15:32, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]


Keep
Perhaps previously the article didnt had enough references which are updated, such as his website, book published by a Colonel and other references which were published after 2016 (after the AFD took place) and they are being used as reference. The previous AFD took place 9 years ago, which is a long time. Again, neither does this article fail WP:BIO nor I have used any fabricated references. This article fulfills all the criteria of WP:BIO. All the references used are cross checked and up to date. There are other articles as well on officers who got Vir Chakra with much less references. Pl check the list of officers with Vir Chakra.[10]. I think deleting the article based on an AFD which took place 9 years ago is not justified , as maybe that time the article didnt had much reliable references and the person had not gotten enough media coverage. I am unsure why an user is saying the article contains 'salted materials', perhaps you should check the references I have used. -- CaptShayan — Preceding undated comment added 17:49, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

My use of the word "salt" refers to WP:SALT. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:28, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Okay, I get it that the article was recreated after getting deleted. But this time the article contains better and accurate references. It does not fail WP:BIO nor WP:NOTE.
I don't think it's okay to delete an article based on an AFD which took place years ago AS the article is an updated version of the previous deleted article with more accurate references. CaptShayan (talk) 18:36, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
More then half of the references I have used were published a few years after the AFD took place, so it is not 'repost' of previously deleted articles. You can check the date of the references. CaptShayan (talk) 18:44, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
When an admin WP:SALTs an article, then they are declaring that they do not want an article on that subject to be created. Recreating an article at an incorrect title to circumvent that block is inherently disruptive behavior as I see it. Other members of the community are apparently more tolerant of this than me, though. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:39, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
The article wasn't created at an incorrect title, as he was an serving officer of Indian Army. However, I don't understand why don't you want a better version of a previously deleted article which had poor citations. CaptShayan (talk) 19:54, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Of course it was created at an incorrect title. We only disambiguate articles when there's something else to disambiguate them from - I refuse to believe you didn't try to create this at Vijayant Thapar, see you weren't able to, and resort to this hack to get it done anyway. And I will do everything in my power to stamp that sort of trickery out. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:29, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
This is not a trickery but a willing to contribute. CaptShayan (talk) 20:34, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Whatever you want to believe, believe it man. But I hope you will at least let others contribute to this AFD instead of taking a decision on the basis of a 9 years old AFD CaptShayan (talk) 20:36, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
I am letting others contribute. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:39, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Inbox Pictures (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

This article is about a film production company that fails to meet notability. The article is sourced only to the company's web site. My search for coverage only turns up passing mentions about them when covering some films where the company was involved. This falls well short of being significant coverage. Whpq (talk) 13:35, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

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 should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. Apart from that, activities like opening new plants, entering into new business segments like icecream, etc., are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:13, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. An alternative to deletion could be merging with CK Birla Group. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

A suspended company from the stock exchange. Fails WP:NCORP, and WP:CORPDEPTH. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:04, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

AfDs for this article:
Pisasu 2 (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Article not written in Encyclopedia format, and I don't think this mees WP:Notability Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 03:09, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Not yet notable enough for a separate encyclopedia article.
The only somewhat notable thing I could find about the film was its release window being delayed due to a legal dispute, such as this Times of India article. But these sources say nothing about what the film itself is about, only the fact that the release was delayed. I don’t think you could write an entire article just saying "This film got delayed" and nothing else.
And this article about the film currently does not mention this dispute at all, even though that’s the film’s only appearance in reliable sources. ApexParagon (talk) 04:07, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Vastav Artificial Intelligence (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

The article lacks significant coverage from independent, reliable secondary sources as required by WP:NOTABILITY.Much of the content is derived from company materials and press releases, contravening WP:PRIMARY SOURCES guidelines.The article reads like promotional material without sufficient neutral analysis, failing to meet WP:NPOV standards. Also a stub with minimal content, it does not meet the quality standards expected for an encyclopedic entry (WP:STUB). Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 03:22, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Sources are primary. Fails criteria for Schools. Not Notable . Rahmatula786 (talk) 02:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

The article fails notability. I can't find any significant (or even insignificant) coverage of this hindu temple by any reliable or notable sources. The only source of this article gives me a security warning when trying to access the page. Not exactly the best sign. Gaismagorm (talk) 19:06, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

A completely unnotable temple in india. The article is completely unsourced, and some searching on google finds nothing that shows any form of notability. The closest thing to a source is a website about the family that build it (i think), but thats a primary source. Absolutely no coverage by outside sources. Gaismagorm (talk) 18:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

This article was created by a confirmed sockpuppet identified in the SPI case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Lazy-restless/Archive. The creation by a blocked user tied to the "Lazy-restless" investigation suggests potential WP:POV pushing. The subject does not meet WP:GNG, as no sources provide sufficient coverage. NXcrypto Message 12:45, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]


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

As per Hindu tradition, no recognized observance is known as Tulsi Pujan Diwas. This so-called event is a fabricated concept introduced and propagated by a convicted individual to influence public perception and shape a narrative to serve personal or ideological interests. True Hindu customs and rituals have evolved over centuries through deeply rooted spiritual and cultural practices, and any attempt to artificially engineer or impose new observances without a historical or scriptural basis raises concerns. Such efforts to modify religious beliefs and practices through deliberate social engineering not only lack authenticity but also pose a risk of distorting traditional faith and misleading followers. Therefore, the legitimacy and intent behind such artificially created events remain highly questionable. Charlie (talk) 10:59, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Very little of what you (OP) said is reason to delete a WP-article. Failing WP:N is the basic reason to delete. If there are WP:RS that notes criticism of this festival, perhaps that can be added too. Per Tulsi Pujan Diwas 2024: Date, rituals, and significance (India Today ), other views than yours exist. That said, there may be reason to delete, or merge to Tulasi in Hinduism or another article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:26, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
A merge to Tulasi in Hinduism seems an appropriate outcome here. That concedes there's something notable here but possibly not enough to sustain an article. Simonm223 (talk) 12:29, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Weak keep - I too would like to see more academic sources, but it looks like there are somewhat reliable sources on the topic as described above. Gommeh (talk/contribs) 18:46, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Merge into Asaram Bapu, where an appropriate sentence can be added. We have enough sources to attest that Asaram Bapu promulgated this festival in 2014 (eg, [18]) but little independent reliable sourcing of anything else.
Despite superficial appearances of the sources listed above, there is no evidence of the "festival" being celebrated widely or its notability independent of Asaram Bapu. Most/all of news articles cited are mere re-publications of press releases and third-party content as should be obvious from reading the puff-pieces or noting the disclaimer at the bottom of the Economic Times article. See also WP:NEWSORGINDIA on how this is a common, often unmarked, practice in Indian media and does not contribute to the subject's notability.
And this article in a newly formed journal with a single issue is neither a reliable source, nor is it talking about the subject of the wikipedia article; the "Tulsi Pujan Diwas" it is referring to falls on "eleventh day of the bright fortnight of Kartik month (also known as Dev Uthani Ekadashi)", ie roughly mid-November as opposed to the Christmas-alternative established by Asaram Bapu. Abecedare (talk) 20:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
That refers to Tulasi Vivaha, which is the actual event according to Hindu traditions. Charlie (talk) 04:25, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep. It doesn't matter whether the observance is recognized. It doesn't matter whether it's fabricated, or why, or by whom. It doesn't matter whether it's new, lacks authenticity or poses a societal risk. What matters is whether it is notable. Valereee (talk) 13:49, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Comment Being receptive to Valereee and GGS' comments I'm changing my !vote from weak deletion to weak keep or merge. I still feel the citations might be a bit scant for a full article but it's clear there's at least some minimal notability here. Simonm223 (talk) 13:52, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Merge to Asaram, Tulasi in Hinduism, and/or Tulsi. The religious significance of the plant in various branches of Hinduism isn't in doubt, and there is lots of source material about it, including scholarly sources (which indeed is why Tulasi in Hinduism exists). But much of the material I'm seeing related to this title refers to the general phenomenon of religious belief or ritual related to the plant, not to this specific observance. The article as it stands has three sentences related specifically to this observance, and I cannot find anything else citeable to reliable, intellectually independent sources. As such a standalone article is not justified: the announcement of the observance can be sufficiently documented at Asaram, and the ritual at Tulasi in Hinduism: the satire does not strike me as encyclopedic. TL:DR; Contra several colleagues above, there isn't SIGCOV specific to this observance, only to the place of this plant in Hindu belief and practice. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:52, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Merge to Asaram. It is still far behind the minimum requirement when it comes to meeting WP:GNG. Dympies (talk) 00:57, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Delete The article on Tulsi Pujan Diwas fails to meet Wikipedia’s core policies for inclusion, particularly the General Notability Guidelines (WP:GNG), as it lacks substantial coverage from multiple, independent, and reliable sources. The observance itself was created in 2014 by Asaram Bapu, making it a recent and artificially introduced event rather than an organically evolved tradition within Hinduism. Unlike established Hindu festivals such as Tulasi Vivaha, which has deep-rooted religious and scriptural significance, Tulsi Pujan Diwas exists only within the sphere of Asaram Bapu’s influence and has not gained broad cultural or religious acceptance outside his following. The sources cited in support of the article are largely press releases and promotional content, violating Wikipedia’s guidelines on reliable sourcing (WP:NEWSORGINDIA) and neutral point of view (WP:NPOV), as Indian media often republish unverified statements without editorial scrutiny. This observance has not been the subject of scholarly research or detailed academic discussion, which further weakens its claim to notability, as Wikipedia prioritizes topics with long-term, independent significance rather than temporary, sect-specific practices. Additionally, per Wikipedia’s event notability policy (WP:EVENT), Tulsi Pujan Diwas does not have a sustained impact or independent historical validation, making its existence on Wikipedia tenuous at best. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 03:37, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Rise East Entertainment (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Sources are related to the respective films produced by the subject and do not provide any coverage of the production house itself. None of the sources in the article provide significant coverage of the subject. Subject does not meet WP:NCORP or WP:SIGCOV. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:15, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Lacks Notability. Given Sources are primary. No significant coverage in Independent Sources. Rahmatula786 (talk) 09:40, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Fails Wikipedia:Notability (films). No reliable reviews [19], [20], and [21]. Sources in Release section are not specific to this film, but talk about both actors' post debut films' performance.

Source 1 doesn't help much, such sources got Singara Chennai deleted [22]. DareshMohan (talk) 03:30, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Does not pass WP:NEVENT. There's news he got sentenced but basically nothing else between or since. Though, I do not know what the names of the event and people would be in the native language, so I could not search that. If notability proving coverage does exist there feel free to present it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

2025 Meerut Merchant Navy officer murder (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Does not pass WP:NEVENT. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:40, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Clearly fails WP:GNG, There is no significant coverage in the cited sources. Koshuri (グ) 14:23, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Spammy recreation of Altacit Global, which was nuked under G5 earlier; see also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Expertwikiguy (permalink to latest report). As for the company itself, much of its coverage is in the form of PR pieces, paid-for puff pieces like this, or some passing mentions with no further detail. Subject fails WP:NCORP and by a good margin. Java Hurricane 11:25, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Fails WP:Notability (films). See that Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force#Generally used sources lists Filmibeat as unreliable. There are no reliable reviews [23], [24], and [25]. DareshMohan (talk) 07:39, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I don't know who added Filmibeat to the category/red "plainly unreliable" but the decision seems based on (at least refers to) 2 discussions. Let's have a look: two short threads; one is about BLP that only concludes "For now, I would suggest not using it in BLPs on the basis of "least harm" in 2015, while in the other (same year) THREE users find it.... RELIABLE!!! and NONE, NON-RELIABLE. So maybe it's not great journalism (certainly the article is not great) but the consensus about not using it for verification of uncontroversial facts is not clear (more recent opinions expressed (2022/2023) on the noticeboard about the site are based on its presence in red at ICTF...).So if the consensus exists, it should not be based on the 2 threads it quotes. -Mushy Yank. 23:46, 25 March 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 March 25. —cyberbot I Talk to my owner:Online 08:00, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Redirect to List of Tamil films of 2003 : standard WP:ATD for released films with notable cast; not opposed to Keep, as this is 2003 and print sources might exist and show this meets WP:NFIC in some way. Opposed to deletion. -Mushy Yank. 10:52, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Redirect to List_of_Tamil_films_of_2003#July—September or Delete. 2 sources on the page, one is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES and the other just lists the song track from the movie. Nothing notable and no significant coverage. RangersRus (talk) 15:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Comment: I'm a bit uncomfortable redirecting non-notable films to a main list page. I feel like this runs the risk of turning list pages into entries that violate WP:INDISCRIMINATE and turn them into a database collecting any and every film that could potentially fall under that criteria. This not only makes the page unwieldy, but it would make it difficult to really determine which films are notable. It also kind of encourages people to come on and create pages for their non-notable movies because they're getting "rewarded" with a mention of their film somewhere. Sometimes we do have cases where a film warrants mention somewhere, but doesn't pass NFILM, but those are pretty rare and are cases where something falls just shy of NFILM. Those are typically things like an early or extremely rare example of a film, or one where it's frequently mentioned in RS but never in enough depth to pass NFILM. It's extremely rare that this comes along. This film? Tamil language movies are released all the time, sometimes with notable people, sometimes not. The film existing doesn't necessarily mean that it is notable and needs mention on Wikipedia somewhere.
I'm going to bring this up at the film WikiProject. I get wanting to include everything, but this just feels too inclusionary for my tastes. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 21:27, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Just have a look at the cast, please. -Mushy Yank. 22:35, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Indian Academy Group of Institutions (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

This group of colleges does not meet the WP:NSCHOOL guidelines because it falls short in several important ways. There isn’t enough coverage from independent and trustworthy sources, which is needed to show that the colleges are notable. Without strong recognition or mention in well-known and reliable publications (as required by WP:RSP), the colleges don’t have the visibility or significance needed to meet notability standards. Charlie (talk) 18:46, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Fails GNG. Most of the provided sources are unsupported by given sources. Few press releases and passing mention. Rest are primary sources. The amount of unsourced information provided here also indicates COI & Advertising. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:52, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

The creator of the page has repeatedly attempted to create this unsourced article under multiple titles that appears to be a very small village with no WP:RS able to be found that would satisfy WP:NSETTLEMENT. This particular title has been draftifyed twice for no sources and has been moved back to the mainspace twice with no changes. I propose to redirect the article to Dimow along with the other attempted creations of this article. cyberdog958 Talk 07:45, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Fails GNG. Doesn't Comply WP: Schools. Given sources are primary. Nothing but a promotional Piece. Rahmatula786 (talk) 06:37, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Subject fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG. Mentions along with companies, unreliable sources, interviews, etc. Moved to draft space as an WP:ATD but moved right back by creator who has a clear WP:COI. CNMall41 (talk) 20:47, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

contributor to this article don't have any close connection with its subject. Whatever written in the article are only based on the news sources. Every statement is supported by supportive news sources. Naanioffl (talk) 20:49, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
That is not true based on your own disclosure for the image you uploaded, and the image you uploaded for Shashwat Singh. COI is a side issue that can be discussed on your talk page. In the meantime, if you are able to point out the references that are about the subject as opposed to just mentions or interviews. We need references that talk about him in-depth. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:51, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Dear Sir, Please check the following significant news coverages about the subject (Which are used in the article). Those are not just media mentions. Those are proper news articles about Sumit Gupta.
1. https://www.apnnews.com/sumit-gupta-from-small-town-beginnings-to-leading-indias-crypto-revolution/
2. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/invest/we-are-still-at-the-beginning-of-something-huge-coindcx-founders-on-the-future-of-crypto/articleshow/118702888.cms?from=mdr
3. https://www.forbesindia.com/article/special/crypto-will-not-be-hit-as-hard-as-other-startup-sectors-sumit-gupta/76855/1
4. https://aithority.com/interviews/aithority-interview-with-sumit-gupta-co-founder-ceo-coindcx/
5. https://www.ndtv.com/offbeat/coindcx-founders-tell-the-story-of-one-of-indias-largest-crypto-exchanges-2469435
6. https://www.businesstoday.in/crypto/story/crypto-industry-is-moving-faster-than-any-other-sector-says-sumit-gupta-of-coindcx-308951-2021年10月10日
7. https://www.werisebyliftingothers.in/2024/08/biogarphy-of-sumit-gupta-co-founder-and.html
8. https://www.fortuneindia.com/multimedia/creating-startup-in-crypto-is-difficult-40u40-2024-sumit-gupta-coindcx/118143
9. https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-man-who-started-business-from-ordinary-flat-now-runs-rs-16000-crore-company-as-3084277
10. https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-man-who-started-business-from-a-small-flat-built-rs-16000-crore-company-in-4-years-he-is-from-3072678#google_vignette
11. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/expert-view/web3-is-going-to-help-india-and-add-value-to-the-current-financial-systems-says-coindcxs-sumit-gupta/articleshow/90952667.cms?from=mdr
12. https://www.forbesindia.com/article/cryptocurrency/india-is-going-to-be-a-clear-global-hub-for-web3-sumit-gupta-at-namaste-web3/83697/1
13.https://www.businesstoday.in/crypto/story/coinswitch-kuber-coindcx-ceos-to-chair-crypto-council-of-iamai-310843-2021年10月29日
14. https://scroll.in/article/1003237/how-two-long-time-college-friends-built-indias-first-crypto-unicorn
15. https://m.rediff.com/money/special/tech-meet-the-man-behind-coindcx-indias-first-crypto-unicorn/20210916.htm
I think these news coverages are significant enough. Kindly check. All these news sources are used as citation. Naanioffl (talk) 21:21, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
One more significant news coverage: https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/blitzscaling-in-times-of-uncertainty-meet-sumit-gupta-ceo-coindcx-121081700025_1.html Naanioffl (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
This page is not written as promotion. This page is written in a neutral way and each statement is supported with significant news sources. This page should not get deletion notice.
This page is not written as promotion. This page is written in a neutral way and each statement is supported with significant news sources. This page should not get deletion notice.
You can't just randomly come and put deletion notice on the page. First check the information and their supportive news sources before taking any random action. All the news sources are significant enough.
Not a single promotional tone was used while creation of the page. Each and every statement in the page is supported with proper notable news sources.
Also I don't have any close connection with the subject. I have done deep search on Google, found significant news sources and the article is made completely based on those notable news sources. Its not written to promote anything. Naanioffl (talk) 20:51, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
I did not waste my time beyond the first four references as it demonstrates you are just posting links without assessing them. The first is bylined as "NS" which indicates it is WP:NEWSORGINDIA and unreliable. There is also no editorial oversight listed on the website so not reliable imho. The second is about the company and only mentions Gupta. It is also an interview so not WP:INDEPENDENT. The third is an interview so again, not independent. Also from Forbes India which is not Forbes so each reference there needs evaluated separately. The fourth is again, another interview. It is also paid media so not independent. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:49, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Sir,
the following news sources are reliable, non paid media and significant too.
https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-man-who-started-business-from-ordinary-flat-now-runs-rs-16000-crore-company-as-3084277
https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-man-who-started-business-from-a-small-flat-built-rs-16000-crore-company-in-4-years-he-is-from-3072678#google_vignette
https://www.ndtv.com/offbeat/coindcx-founders-tell-the-story-of-one-of-indias-largest-crypto-exchanges-2469435
https://www.businesstoday.in/crypto/story/crypto-industry-is-moving-faster-than-any-other-sector-says-sumit-gupta-of-coindcx-308951-2021年10月10日
https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/blitzscaling-in-times-of-uncertainty-meet-sumit-gupta-ceo-coindcx-121081700025_1.html
https://scroll.in/article/1003237/how-two-long-time-college-friends-built-indias-first-crypto-unicorn
https://m.rediff.com/money/special/tech-meet-the-man-behind-coindcx-indias-first-crypto-unicorn/20210916.htm
https://www.fortuneindia.com/multimedia/creating-startup-in-crypto-is-difficult-40u40-2024-sumit-gupta-coindcx/118143
https://www.businesstoday.in/crypto/story/crypto-industry-is-moving-faster-than-any-other-sector-says-sumit-gupta-of-coindcx-308951-2021年10月10日
Kindly go though these news sources. I am requesting you to re-evaluate. Hoping for your positive response.
Thanks, and Regards. Naanioffl (talk) 22:54, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
The claim that Sumit Gupta does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for biographies is incorrect. His notability is well-established through significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources, as well as recognition from prestigious organisations. Here’s why:
1.⁠ ⁠Independent & Reliable Coverage in Leading Publications Sumit Gupta has been extensively covered by some of the most reputable Indian and global media houses. These articles are not merely interviews or passing mentions—they provide in-depth analysis of his role in shaping India’s crypto landscape.
Business Standard – "Blitzscaling in Times of Uncertainty: Meet Sumit Gupta, CEO CoinDCX" (Aug 2021) : https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/blitzscaling-in-times-of-uncertainty-meet-sumit-gupta-ceo-coindcx-121081700025_1.html
A detailed business profile highlighting his leadership and CoinDCX's growth trajectory.
Not a trivial mention or an interview—this is a feature story assessing his impact.
Scroll.in – "How Two Long-time College Friends Built India’s First Crypto Unicorn" : https://scroll.in/article/1003237/how-two-long-time-college-friends-built-indias-first-crypto-unicorn
An independent piece covering Sumit’s entrepreneurial journey and the rise of CoinDCX.
Hindu Business Line – "India Must Not Shy Away from Crypto Regulations, Says CoinDCX CEO" : https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/money-and-banking/india-must-not-shy-away-from-crypto-regulations-coindcx-ceo-says/article69100847.ece
Discusses Sumit’s views on regulatory frameworks, positioning him as a thought leader.
Moneycontrol – "Regulation on Offshore Crypto Exchanges to Drive Volumes for Indian Peers: Sumit Gupta of CoinDCX" : https://www.moneycontrol.com/technology/regulation-on-offshore-crypto-exchanges-to-drive-volumes-for-indian-peers-sumit-gupta-of-coindcx-article-12755730.html
Features industry insights and expert opinions, not just an interview.
Navbharat Times – "Success Story of Sumit Gupta: IIT Alumni Who Founded CoinDCX Valued at ₹16,000 Cr from a Flat" : https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/business/business-news/success-story-of-sumit-gupta-iit-alumni-who-founded-coindcx-valued-16000-cr-from-flat/articleshow/109045249.cms
Recognizes his entrepreneurial journey as an independent case study.
DNA India – "Meet the Man Who Started Business from a Small Flat and Built ₹16,000 Cr Company in 4 Years"  : https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-man-who-started-business-from-a-small-flat-built-rs-16000-crore-company-in-4-years-he-is-from-3072678#google_vignette
A feature detailing his contribution to the Indian startup ecosystem.
2.⁠ ⁠Quoted as an Industry Expert by Top Media Outlets
Beyond direct coverage, Sumit Gupta is frequently quoted as a credible source on cryptocurrency by major publications:
Times of India – "CoinDCX Co-Founder on Bitcoin Exchange WazirX’s Plan" : https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/coindcx-co-founder-on-bitcoin-exchange-wazirxs-55/45-plan-hate-to-be-saying-this-/articleshow/112126514.cms
Economic Times – "Crypto and High Bourses: Traders Come Up Trumps" : https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/cryptocurrency/crypto-and-high-bourses-traders-come-up-trumps/articleshow/115234343.cms
Business Today – "Coindcx Co-Founder Criticises WazirX’s Recovery Plan" : https://www.businesstoday.in/technology/news/story/utter-nonsense-coindcx-co-founder-criticises-wazirxs-recovery-plan-for-recent-230-million-security-breach-439328-2024年07月29日
These are few independent reports where Sumit’s insights shape the discourse, demonstrating his influence in the industry.
3.⁠ ⁠Recognized by Prestigious Organizations
Sumit Gupta has been honored with several independent recognitions, reinforcing his credibility and leadership:
Fortune India 40 Under 40 (2024) : https://www.fortuneindia.com/multimedia/creating-startup-in-crypto-is-difficult-40u40-2024-sumit-gupta-coindcx/118143
Forbes 30 Under 30 : https://www.forbesindia.com/article/30-under-30-2022/icons-30-those-who-just-missed-the-list/73719/1
Hurun Report - Self-made Entrepreneurs of the Millennia : https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/isha-ambani-akash-ambani-ankush-sachdeva-ghazal-alagh-feature-in-huruns-india-under35s-young-entrepreneurs-list/articleshow/113692023.cms
These accolades are awarded independently by reputable organizations with rigorous selection criteria.
Conclusion: Strong Case for Wikipedia Notability
Multiple reliable, independent sources provide in-depth coverage of Sumit Gupta.
Recognized industry expert, frequently quoted in top-tier financial publications.
Recipient of multiple independent awards, reinforcing his credibility.
If Wikipedia editors require additional citations, I can provide more references. However, dismissing his well-documented impact based on a superficial assessment would be misleading.
Would you like more detailed excerpts from these articles to further strengthen the case? Naanioffl (talk) 18:44, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Who is "we?"--CNMall41 (talk) 01:11, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Sorry. That was a grammatical mistake while writing. I have edited the response. Thanks. Naanioffl (talk) 04:28, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
While Writing, a person may have grammatical mistakes. That was a grammatical mistake while writing. I have edited the response. Thank You. It was not created with an LLM. Hope you understand human errors. Naanioffl (talk) 04:38, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
I have re structured the article. Hope it is perfect now. Naanioffl (talk) 15:30, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Kaki Singer (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Lack of WP:SIGCOV in secondary independent sources. Most of the sources used on this article are unreliable and the original creator of this article was blocked for sockpuppetry, may be created for promotional purposes. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC TheSlumPanda (talk) 19:32, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

While reviewing my past AfD nominations, I came across this page and noticed that it has been further improved. Upon closer examination, I discovered that the book in question was published under the Penguin Enterprise imprint, which is essentially a vanity publishing division of Penguin Random House India. As per WP:NBOOKS, "Self-publication and/or publication by a vanity press do not establish notability." So, I am nominating the page again. This book is simply a strategic attempt to improve someone's public image. Charlie (talk) 17:18, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

That it was self-published doesn't make it not notable if there are reviews. It just tends to correlate with a lack of reviews. Reviews were brought up in the last AfD. Do you have new reason to believe those are unreliable (not out of the question since NEWSORGINDIA) PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:06, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
In my personal opinion, I feel that a book published through a vanity press and written by a rocket scientist rather than a business expert may not have the same credibility as works from any other established author. Also, a glance at the author's Wikipedia page shows that they have written on almost every topic imaginable, which is quite something. Interestingly, the book is mostly reviewed in Indian news portals (which, as everyone knows, lacks integrity WP:NEWSORGINDIA) instead of respected academic journals, which makes one wonder about the recognition it’s getting. Overall, things don’t quite seem to add up. Now, if I let my imagination run a little further, it wouldn’t be too far-fetched to think that Govind Dholakia, the subject of this autobiography, might have funded this autobiography to bolster his bid for a Rajya Sabha seat. While it is being claimed that he has been 'elected,' a closer look at the process tells a different story. In India, Rajya Sabha members from each state are chosen by the state's MLAs through an indirect election using proportional representation with a single transferable vote (STV). Given that Gujarat's legislature is dominated by BJP MLAs and that Dholakia was fielded as a BJP candidate, it’s hardly surprising that he secured the seat. It does raise the question, though was this a genuine election or just a well-orchestrated move to further his legacy? Charlie (talk) 05:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
I see your points, however the issue is that an author or publisher's credibility isn't necessarily the deciding factor in whether or not a book passes notability guidelines or is independently notable of its author or subject. What is the deciding factor would be coverage in independent and reliable sources.
Now as far as sourcing goes, you're correct in that there is an issue with churnalism in Indian news sources. However that doesn't mean that all Indian news sources are unusable. Some are, but others can still be usable - and with others it might be a case of where in the paper the article was published rather than the outlet as a whole. WP:ICTFSOURCES has a pretty good list of what's usable and what isn't. The list is geared towards film, however it should suffice in this situation as well. Offhand with the article, most of the sources are from usable outlets like Deccan Chronicle, The Asian Age, and Outlook India. The Indian Express is usable as long as it's not from their Brand section. DeshGujarat and The Hindu Businessline are kind of questionable. Both would need to go through WP:RS/N to determine its usability even for minor details. What doesn't help with THB is that the film sourcing list mentions them as an example of incorrect reporting. All of that means that even if we remove the questionable sources, that still leaves us with three definitely usable sources, all of which are reviews - so notability is established.
Now instead of arguing notability or bringing up the article's creation history, a better argument to make would be whether or not there's enough information about the book to make an individual article worthwhile or if it's largely redundant to the main article on Dholakia. One common issue with biographies is that sometimes the book fails to get any coverage other than reviews of the work. This means that there's no coverage on the writing process or any other information that would be unique to the book - note that this coverage would include primary sources like the author's website or interviews about the book's development. In cases like this the book may pass notability guidelines, but still not have enough overall information to really be all that useful - so in some cases it ends up that the book can be more or less summarized in a paragraph on the subject's Wikipedia page. Now, I haven't looked at any of the sources so it's entirely possible that this coverage does exist and can be used to flesh out the book article and make it worthwhile. I think that should absolutely be explored. Otherwise it's a case of merge and redirect rather than delete because the book is notable - it's just a question of where it should be covered. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 16:37, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
@ReaderofthePack your words leave no room for debate. If this AfD discussion requires a proper and conclusive closure, it must be grounded in the reasoning put forth by you. Thank you for not only guiding this discussion but also helping me understand better. Charlie (talk) 18:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
No problem! Biographies are kind of a weird area, honestly. Whenever they come up part of me wants to keep them for completionism, but in many cases there's just not a lot of non-review information. If the parent page is particularly large I'll often argue for inclusion because it would be difficult to really include content about the book adequately, but in this case the subject's article is kind of lean and a small section about that would help flesh it out more. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 20:55, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Kerala Cricket League (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Still the same as from previous AfD. Not enough coverage and not notable. Agent 007 (talk) 14:16, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Majority of the references are press releases or announcements. No significant coverage. Does not appear to be notable under WP:NCORP or WP:GNG. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:08, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

This article provides a more comprehensive discussion of an application he developed. The majority of the references relate to the Chingari (app), which similarly appears to be a non-notable application. Nonetheless, the references fail to meet WP:RS criteria to validate WP:GNG. Bakhtar40 (talk) 04:59, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Fails WP:NBIO and WP:AUTHOR, there is no significant coverage, most of it can be attributed to the controversial statements he has made. CharlesWain (talk) 17:59, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

This train station fails notability guidelines. Clearly not notable, i was unable to find any sources about it. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 17:52, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Not a G4 since it was a soft close, but no indication of notability. This is a private university. Star Mississippi 15:12, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Nothing more than a WP:POVFORK of List of wars involving India. Not to mention the blatant WP:OR done throughout this article. There was no single "Sikh" entity that fought the Mughals. Cobbling up all a bunch of empires as "Sikh" and creating out an article is totally misleading. Koshuri (グ) 14:42, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Reason Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 12:45, 22 March 2025 (UTC) This entire article contains numerous unreferenced claims about the various variants of sit-ups, lacking any reliable sources to support them. The information appears to have been added by some bunch of students, incorporating misleading and nonsensical details that violate Wikipedia’s content policies. Furthermore, most of the information on this topic is derived from news sources and it is not required to make a seperate article for this topic in wikipedia if further research isn't made.[reply ]

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

Lacks Notability. Not a single independent significant Coverage. Most of the articles are repetition of news about his appointment. And rest are the passing mentions. There are some Sources which talk about awards , but none of these awards seem to be notable. Rahmatula786 (talk) 08:08, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

All of the sources in this article are about a person who is not the article subject. The sources are all about Pandit Jasraj and the subject is claimed to be his guru based on this. That isn’t the quality of sourcing we need for a stand alone bio. The bio of Jasraj doesn’t mention this subject, so the claim he was his guru looks a bit shaky. Mccapra (talk) 07:24, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

You raise important points about the sourcing quality. There are few published resources in English where the claim that Pandit Jasraj is Ghulam Qadir Khan's disciple are available. However, among his own disciple community, this is well-known and accepted. Pandit Jasraj speaks about him in this Hindi-language video here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4VMwiG4264). The challenge here is that Ghulam Qadir Khan is an important reference for two of the subcontinent's popular musicians, Pankaj Udhas and Pandit Jasraj. The sourcing quality of the page is certainly not up to the standards of the relevance of this individual.
I recommend that the deletion nomination should be removed but the stub for notability guidelines should remain. Others in the community (such as myself) will work to bring this page to the sourcing quality it demands.
Given that this page relies on sourcing outside of the English language, it will take time to collect citations in Hindi and Gujarati, where this figure is more prevalent. This page should remain on the English language Wikipedia because of the wide use of English on this Indian subcontinent, where this page is relevant. Karanderao (talk) 01:09, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Naari (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Un-sourced article filled with promotional content. No indication of company's notability and doesn't meet WP:ORGCRITE. Unable to find significant coverage in WP:BEFORE. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:22, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Speedy Delete. doesn't have any sources. My search produced a few press releases only.Darkm777 (talk) 01:44, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Arti Mehra (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Despite her extensive political history, I don't really think she is notable under the Wikipedia guidelines. She hasn't been covered by many news sources, even Delhi local news sources, she is overshadowed by her bigger politician peers, the last coverage was over 10 years ago by reliable sources, and theres not anything extraordinary she did. DotesConks (talk) 04:44, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Hello DotesConks,
Thank you for your feedback. While I understand your point about the extent of media coverage, I believe that Arti Mehra's political career and contributions to Delhi's development make her notable under Wikipedia's guidelines.
1.⁠ ⁠*Political Roles and Achievements*: Arti Mehra served as the Mayor of Delhi for two consecutive terms, a position that requires significant leadership and involvement in governance. She was involved in several important initiatives, including infrastructure development (flyovers, hospitals, and multi-level parking), health reforms, women's empowerment projects, and urban development. These roles show her impact on local governance and urban development, which is significant in her political sphere.
2.⁠ ⁠*International Recognition*: Mehra represented India on global platforms, including speaking at the 62nd United Nations General Assembly and attending international conferences on climate change and women's empowerment. This further establishes her as a notable figure, especially within the context of global politics.
3.⁠ ⁠*References and Media Coverage: Although the news coverage might not be frequent, there are reliable sources like the *Deccan Chronicle and others that have acknowledged her work, including her participation in significant global events. Her contributions, particularly in governance and women's empowerment, have been discussed in reputable outlets. Her role in international relations and her representation of India at high-level events should be taken into account when evaluating her notability.
4.⁠ ⁠*Historical and Political Context*: While she may not have been continuously in the media spotlight, her position as a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and her involvement in Delhi’s political landscape over several years show a long-standing commitment to public service. It is important to consider her overall career impact rather than just recent news coverage.
I would also like to politely mention that there are many people whose contributions are a lot to the society but they don’t have as much media coverage currently. All their articles should be deleted as per your logic.
I believe her political influence, both locally and internationally, qualifies her for inclusion under Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for politicians. However, I appreciate your thoughts on this and am open to further discussion if needed.
Best regards, King changer (talk) 05:38, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
...All of which mean absolutely nothing without any sort of sources to back up your obviously AI-generated message. Sources are a hard requirement for any content concerning a living person; this is not negotiable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 05:41, 22 March 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. I see consensus that the sources identified do not provide SIGCOV or are otherwise unreliable. Owen×ばつ ☎ 22:19, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

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

Non notable subject, lack of Wp:SIGCOV. Poorly sourced and promotional content. Zuck28 (talk) 21:33, 21 March 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.
Sesha Sindhu Rao (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

possibly an advertisement...almost all sources are unreliable..they did cite sources from The Times of India and The Hindu but that doesn't necessarily indicate significance. - AwfulReader (talk) 07:19, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Hi.
Added as many sources from youtube interviews on local Telugu news channels such as idream Media and NTV as possible. As the subject is an up and coming director, the citations are mostly from local news channels. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 07:23, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
https://www.amazon.com/prime-video/actor/Sesha-Sindhu-Rao/amzn1.dv.gti.dcd0065f-a6a0-4659-8012-46280ec9766a/
Sindhu is also listed as a director on Prime Video and is a person of significance. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 07:47, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Sindhu has been a person of significance in the industry since before she became a director as well. Featured here in this article from 2017 https://www.deccanchronicle.com/entertainment/tollywood/220817/women-in-the-mens-world.html Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 09:49, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
@Chakrabartyprateek14, Do you know her personally? Zuck28 (talk) 10:22, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
@Chakrabartyprateek14 there's a lot of information about her personal life and career, which is not easily verifiable with the given citations.
also you uploaded a copyrighted image of her, which was uploaded on IMDb already without any photographers name or copyright information. But you mentioned the name of the photographer as well. How do you know all of this? Zuck28 (talk) 10:28, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
This information and anecdotes were shared with me by the subject herself. Most of which I tried to include citations for.
While uploading the picture.. I asked the subject for the photographer's name and credentials. And the photographer waived off any rights that may raise any copyright issues. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 10:37, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
The photo you uploaded is missing the permissions from the copyright holder and the information you asked from the subject directly is not supposed to be on Wikipedia without any reference. Most likely it appears to be a case of COI or UPE.
But I will leave this matter into the hands of some other experienced editor or admin.
Zuck28 (talk) 12:07, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
What do COI or UPE mean? If it helps, whatever is un-cited/un-referenced, can be toned down or taken off.
Please do suggest. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 20:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Wp:COI & wp:UPE Zuck28 (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Thank you for these.
I'll add appropriate tags for COI.
If you can help with editing or trimming down content where you see necessary, it would be helpful. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 06:07, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen×ばつ ☎ 13:04, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
2025 International Masters League (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Fails WP:SIGCOV and (削除) WP:GNG (削除ここまで) WP:NSPORTSEVENT for standalone season articles. Vestrian24Bio 03:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, Cricket, and India. Vestrian24Bio 03:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep The correct specific policy on this topic is WP:NSEASONS. There it is clear that notability is dependent on how much media coverage games get. The article topic features games which have each had coverage (in depth match reports) in major national newspapers. Taking just the second game as an example (as a stronger test case because it doesn't involve the hosts India, who featured in the first), one can find detailed reports in The Hindu, SportsMax, Outlook, Business Standard, Hindustan Times and so on. Detailed reports are key because they go way beyond what might be described as WP:ROUTINE, which is where people try to derive notability for sporting events and seasons from the mere reporting of match scores. So WP:NSEASONS appears clearly to be met. I would note that the nominator has proposed this AfD a bare 89 minutes after their AfD for International Masters League (the page detailing the competition as a whole) was closed as no consensus - a discussion in which I was involved (but very few others). It may help people to read that discussion there. OsFish (talk) 07:24, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    (削除) WP:NSEASONS (削除ここまで) WP:NSPORTSEVENT says, "A game that is widely considered by independent reliable sources to be notable, outside routine coverage of each game" - even if you don't agree with it these are all still WP:ROUTINE coverage.
    What you're doing here is just WP:ONLYGUIDELINE and WP:ATTP. Vestrian24Bio 07:40, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    No, WP:NSEASONS does not say that. You've read the wrong policy. You're quoting WP:NSPORTSEVENT, the policy for individual games. WP:ROUTINE does not apply as I made clear above, because the policy there says "Wedding announcements, sports scores, crime logs, and other items that tend to get an exemption from newsworthiness discussions should be considered routine" (emphasis added). I explicitly linked to detailed coverage, not mere reporting of sports scores. The argument you make implies that ANY newspaper coverage of sports matches cannot be considered relevant for notability of a tournament. That's quite clearly against WP:NSEASONS which attaches notability to the extent of coverage of games in general. OsFish (talk) 08:09, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    Sorry, that's my mistake. But, none of WP:NSEASONS apply to this; it's for article such as 2025 Chennai Super Kings season and 2025 Sydney Roosters season (Individual season articles for top-level professional teams). Vestrian24Bio 08:28, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    If you simply want to go by WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV, which is the presence of discriminating, significant coverage in multiple reliable sources, independent of the topic, then notability is clearly met. Uncontroversially so. OsFish (talk) 09:11, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    I have made some changes to my opening comment now. Vestrian24Bio 11:45, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    WP:NSPORTSEVENT does not apply here because that is about a single game or a "series" in the North American sense of a championship decider where the top or final two teams playing a short series of matches against each other. As the policy says, "The final series (or single game when there is not a series) determining the champion of a top league". This article here is about a tournament featuring several teams. WP:SIGCOV is easily met. There are multiple RS directly and solely about the tournament. (SIGCOV is a subset of GNG). OsFish (talk) 12:42, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Delete yet another of these non-notable masters cricket tournaments. The coverage of this is all trying to claim notability by notable players, which is a clear case of WP:NOTINHERITED. Joseph 2302 (talk) 16:10, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    Can you point to an example of such claims? I see absolutely no claims based upon the notability of players. OsFish (talk) 17:27, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    The sources above being listed as "detailed reports" are just WP:ROUTINE coverage of cricket matches. Most of the sources in the article care more about the players because of their notable careers rather than this tournament. There are tonnes of these masters cricket tournaments, and every time one turns up, people create (and often re-create) articles for them, and almost every time they get deleted as non notable and just trying to violate WP:NOTINHERITED. I see nothing different from the sources here. Joseph 2302 (talk) 09:10, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    The thing is, WP:ROUTINE refers to the reporting of scores, not write-ups of matches. On your reading, ALL sports competition articles would be non-notable. An editor’s personal antipathy towards these tournaments isn’t a reason for deletion, nor is the anticipation of arguments that haven’t been made. OsFish (talk) 09:16, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    Also the patent article International Masters League only just survived and AFD, we don't need separate season articles for barely/questionably notable tournaments. Joseph 2302 (talk) 09:18, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    None of the criteria of WP:NSEASONS are met because it isn't a season of a high level tournament. All useful information can be added to parent article. Joseph 2302 (talk) 09:21, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    That AfD ended as no consensus because there were basically just two of us discussing it. As you will be aware, the closer said "The result was no consensus‎. But it sounds as if coverage brought up in the discussion could be considered sufficient." So that’s hardly scraping survival. WP:NSEASONS does not apply only to "high level" tournaments, as shown in this AfD. It literally is mostly made up of how you judge the notability of a competition that is not high level and thus presumed notable. It’s also important to remember that WP:NOTINHERITED is a rule for Wikipedians, not the real world. For sure, these competitions get media attention because the players are famous, but that’s none of Wikipedia’s business when it comes to deciding what is or isn’t notable. What matters is the coverage, and the coverage clearly passes SIGCOV and GNG in general. One may not like that the real world is like this (and you’ve made your antipathy clear), but that’s not what we’re WP:HERE for. OsFish (talk) 09:56, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Very selective merge to the league article at best; I'd not be opposed to a redirect without merging anything either. We could delete as well, but this really isn't a keep for me. I'd appreciate not having this comment replied to to hound me Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:52, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Delete. The individual editions have zero lasting impact or coverage so fail GNG; and the league itself simply isn't at the level to merit season-by-season articles, per NSEASONS. All coverage is routine. wjemather please leave a message... 11:30, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I need to emphasize, strongly, that your argument for what should happen with an article on AFD has absolutely nothing to do with your personal opinion on whether or not a subject is or isn't important. Please review sources or look for them to see whether or not notability is established. This is not about your point-of-view on a topic.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
All India Gaming Federation (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

fail NCORP; possibly hoax. every link I open leads to not related article. Insillaciv (talk) 11:37, 20 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:36, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
2020–21 KCA President's Cup T20 (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio 11:29, 20 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 13:29, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Let's Talk Money (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Fails WP:NBOOK. There is one maybe usable review here the other is a NEWSORGINDIA issue and seems sponsored. I'm not entirely sure about the other but it seems fine. From a search nothing else. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:11, 20 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

  • These are, 1, the NDTV Profit source already in the article; 2, from Money Control; and 3, from Firstpost. Firstpost is specifically mentioned at WP:NEWSORGINDIA as sometimes doing undisclosed sponsored advertising, though it doesn't mention their book reviews. So I don't think it's any better than the NDTV Profit review that PARAYANKAA flagged as also concerning per NEWSORGINDIA. I am neutral-to-negative on both but acknowledge I am not an expert. As for Money Control, I really struggle to consider it an RS when the website is nearly inoperable with ads and it merely calls itself an "online financial platform" rather than a publication with editorial control. But I am OK with the source from IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review , the journal doesn't look predatory and the review seems normal. So I still agree with PARAYANKAA that we just have one fine source. Unless someone is able to provide a strong defence of NDTV Profit or Firstpost (or turn up new sourcing), I think this is a delete. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 02:07, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:31, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Life of Guru Nanak Through Pictures (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Cited or listed a few times in books about Sikhism but little significant coverage. I found one review that I cannot really access but it seems a standard length academic journal review so that's one [26]. This could have something on the book but I cannot verify whether it is significant [27]. There may be more in whatever language this was originally published in but I was unable to find the original title. The source in the article mentions the book but doesn't mention what we are citing it for (that it was judged one of the best by the president - they're talking about an artist, not the book). This mentions the best thing again but is only one sentence [28] Fails WP:NBOOK. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:39, 20 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:34, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Battle of Delhi (1783) (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

As far as I can read in the cited sources (some are unreliable [29]), this is not even a battle; it is about plundering, collecting tribute, and building Gurudwaras, a topic which isn't really notable enough to deserve it's own article. The cited sources do not call it the "Battle of Delhi" even once.If necessary, we can redirect this page to the Sikh attacks on Delhi. AlvaKedak (talk) 19:28, 19 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. AlvaKedak (talk) 19:28, 19 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:49, 19 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:03, 20 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    Delete per the arguments of the nominator. Ramencolls (talk) 10:52, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep. I agree that the sources that I checked do not say Battle but it is evident from sources that fight took place with Mughals trying to prevent Sikhs from capturing Delhi with significant coverage in reliable sources like Gupta and Gandhi that shows the fight took place, "The Mughal response was swift but ineffective. Prince Mirza Shikoh attempted to repel the Sikhs near Qila Mahtabpur but was defeated and forced to retreat. By March 9, widespread panic had engulfed Delhi as the Sikhs breached the city through the Ajmeri Gate, proceeding to devastate the Hauz Qazi area. In a separate engagement, Fazal Ali Khan confronted the invaders; however, the clash resulted in the death of Rao Dhiraj Ram’s son from Pahari Dhiraj." Passes WP:GNG and maybe renaming the title to Capture of Delhi (1783) will be better. RangersRus (talk) 23:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    The sources cited may mention skirmishes, like the Mughal response or the clash with Fazal Ali Khan, but they do not frame this as a cohesive "battle" or even a singular, significant event. Instead, it is portrayed as part of a broader pattern of Sikh incursions, specifically plunder and collection of tribute, as noted in the nomination. This aligns with WP:NEVENT, which requires events to have lasting significance or widespread recognition, neither of which is evident here beyond routine historical raiding. You suggest renaming it to "Capture of Delhi (1783)," but the sources don’t consistently support a "capture" either; the Sikhs entered, looted, and left, they did not establish control. This makes it a poor fit for a standalone article and more of a footnote to the Sikh attacks on Delhi#Twelfth attack page, where it is already covered adequately. Creating a separate page risks WP:CONTENTFORK, duplicating content without adding value. The quoted passage about Mirza Shikoh and Fazal Ali Khan, while detailed, doesn’t elevate this above other minor clashes in the same sequence, failing WP:SIGCOV for a distinct topic.Deletion, or at minimum a redirect to Sikh attacks on Delhi, is the better option per WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. AlvaKedak (talk) 10:54, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    No I do not agree. Sources clearly show that they fought, captured, plundered, sat on the throne and while some left after days after agreement, there were others who stayed for months to build temples per agreement between the Mughal King and the Sikhs. I am going to leave it to that. RangersRus (talk) 12:19, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Note: I've just rolled back some significant sockpuppet edits, but tbqh looking at the page history I wouldn't be surprised if all the text that remains is also of sockpuppet origin. -- asilvering (talk) 10:27, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep: This is a bit strange. Assessing the sources help me understand that this passes WP:GNG, which supersedes WP:NEVENT if at all there's any debate on whether it passes it or not. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:34, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GrabUp - Talk 20:04, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Leech (2025 film) (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Draft moved back to main space without improvisation. Lacks Notability. Rahmatula786 (talk) 11:17, 19 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

  • Comment. The reviews are images. But I see problem here. The page says the review from Dinamalar and Malaimalar but the reviews sort of show identical views and do not show if they are from Dinamalar and Malaimalar. Dinamalar says "Producer Anoop Ratna is playing the hero Karthi. Megha, Kannan, Nizam Calicut, Thangamuthu, Suhail, Pakar, Sandy, Abhinav, Gayatri have acted with him. There is nothing wrong with their acting. Through this story, director S.M. shows how bad people are when they are alone. He has said. The film puts forward the idea that women should not always allow themselves to be surrounded by loneliness. Cinematographer Arun T. Sasi is to be commended for showing the beauty of the forest. Music composer Kiran Jose has composed the background score well." Malaimalar says "The film tells us that women should always be aware that they should not allow themselves to feel lonely. Cinematographer Arun Sasi is commendable for bringing out the beauty of the forest. Although the characters do not speak much in the film, the background music is used throughout the film. The weakness of the film is the lack of compelling scenes." One more source from Dinakaran, is hardly a review about the film and it is very amateurly written review that is also sort of identical to above reviews that says "The actors have acted appropriately for the roles of Dr. Karthi, Megha, and Sandy Akbar. Producer Anoop Rathna himself plays the hero Karthi. Along with him, Megha, Kannan, Nizam Calicut, Thangamuthu, Suhail, Bakkar, Sandy, Abhinav, and Gayathri act. There is no flaw in their acting. Cinematographer Arun T. Sasi is commendable. Kiran Jose has composed the background music well. The film is written and directed by S.M." This does not seem to come from professional critics. @Monhiroe: and AShiv1212. RangersRus (talk) 16:33, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    First, I want to clarify that I have not added any of my own words in this; I have only translated Tamil into English and included it here. If you want, I can copy the Tamil language as it is and give it to you here. Then you can translate it into English yourself and satisfy your mind. AShiv1212 (talk) 17:02, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    Research was after reading and translating and that is what I have shown in the comment with translation above. RangersRus (talk) 17:08, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    RangersRus (talk) You have raised very important aspect with deeper assessment. Agree with above views. Rahmatula786 (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    Local newspaper journalists are often not big, well-known names. They are either still learning the ropes or write like copy editors. For example, if you look at Kannada film reviews from 2011, you’ll notice that 3-4 newspapers or news channels would simply copy each other’s content.
    More importantly, smaller films don’t get as much news coverage as they deserve, and whatever coverage they do receive often results in reviews of this kind AShiv1212 (talk) 17:20, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to further establish consensus in available sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:47, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Shemford Futuristic School, Muzaffarpur (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

No evidence of any notability. All refs are either affiliated or trivial. Searches find nothing more reliable. PROD removed from article by author without significant improvement. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk   22:14, 16 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD"d, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:49, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Damodar Sharma (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

On a WP:BEFORE search i didnt found any reliable source, fails WP:GNG as well as WP:SIGCOV. All references used in this biography are dead urls and being a vice chancellor doesn't inherit notability without coverage in the Secondary sources. Also he don’t have any prestigious award or high research career to gain notability. Fails WP:NACADEMIC TheSlumPanda (talk) 08:03, 16 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, India, and Rajasthan. TheSlumPanda (talk) 08:03, 16 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Comment. Could the nominator perhaps justify their claim that being vice chancellor (which here means head of an entire university) does not make the subject notable, and that secondary sources are required, when both of those claims would appear to be contradicted by WP:PROF#C6? C6 gives notability to heads of universities and does not require secondary sourcing for that notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:35, 16 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    Thank you for your comment, @David. I appreciate the reference to WP:PROF#C6, which states that notability can be conferred to "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society." While being a vice chancellor (head of a university) could theoretically qualify under this criterion, the guideline still operates within the broader context of Wikipedia’s notability policies, particularly WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to establish notability. WP:NPROF itself is not a standalone exemption from WP:GNG but rather a specific guideline that supplements it, and C6 is typically interpreted as applying when the role or institution is of such prominence that it inherently generates verifiable coverage.
    In this case, my WP:BEFORE search did not uncover any reliable, independent secondary sources providing significant coverage of the subject’s tenure as vice chancellor or their broader academic career. The references in the article are dead URLs, and I couldn’t find alternative sources to substantiate notability. While the position of vice chancellor is significant, not every individual in such a role automatically meets the threshold for notability without evidence of broader impact or recognition (e.g., through awards, high-profile research, or media coverage), as outlined in WP:NACADEMIC and WP:SIGCOV. Without such evidence, I believe the article still fails to meet Wikipedia’s standards for inclusion.
    I’d be happy to reconsider if reliable secondary sources can be provided to demonstrate the subject’s notability under C6 or any other criterion. Absent that, my nomination stands on the grounds of insufficient coverage and failure to meet WP:GNG and WP:NACADEMIC. TheSlumPanda (talk) 04:49, 17 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    In fact you are completely incorrect. WP:PROF does not operate in the broader context of WP:GNG. It is a separate notability standard with its own separate requirements that are not subsumed by GNG. (Nor do they strengthen GNG rather than being subsumed by them, as for instance WP:NORG does.) It explicitly states, as I said before, that independent secondary sourcing is not a requirement for verifying that its criteria are met. (The criteria must still be reliably sourced, but the sources can be primary and non-independent.) —David Eppstein (talk) 06:37, 17 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    Hi @David Eppstein, Recently i also created an article on a vice chancellor of 2 universities (one of them is central university in india) but that got rejected at Afc submission stating that the subject don’t have sig cov. (See). TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:02, 17 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    So this is all an exercise in WP:POINT because your drafts were badly sourced and/or some overworked AfC reviewers weren't familiar with WP:PROF? —David Eppstein (talk) 07:08, 17 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    No thats not because of WP:POINT, i nominated this article because this subject doesn’t have any presence in secondary sources on WP:BEFORE.TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:19, 17 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    @TheSlumPanda, that was definitely a mistake on the part of the reviewer. I'll let them know. -- asilvering (talk) 05:34, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:34, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
List of Women's Premier League (Cricket) awards (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio 07:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We need more opinions here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:47, 23 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Oppose: Does not need to be deleted. OCDD (talk) 08:32, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Lekha Prajapati (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Notability has not improved significantly since the last AfD, with only five or six reliable sources covering it, some of which provide only trivial mentions. It fails WP:NACTOR. Dam222 🌋 (talk) 12:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Comment: First AFD, was closed as soft delete, and article was probably about some other actress or person, since this individual has been seen on films/web from 2019, and it first AFD was in 2017 not sure why first nomination is being considered for nomination Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 09:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]


(削除) Keep – Meets WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG (削除ここまで)

(削除) 1. Significant Roles in Notable Films & Web Series Lekha Prajapati has played key roles in commercially successful and widely released films, meeting the criteria outlined in WP:NACTOR. Some of her notable works include: (削除ここまで)

(削除) (削除ここまで)(削除)

In addition to her film roles, she has worked in prominent web series and digital content, making her a notable actress across multiple platforms, not just a one-time performer. (削除ここまで)

2. Multiple Independent Reliable Sources Coverage about Lekha Prajapati has appeared in multiple reliable sources that meet Wikipedia’s WP:RS guidelines, including:

(削除) (削除ここまで)(削除)

These sources provide significant coverage, not just passing mentions, confirming her growing industry relevance. (削除ここまで)

3. Sustained Industry Presence & Recognition Lekha has been regularly featured in media interviews, film promotions, and publicized for her performances. Unlike minor actors with brief appearances, she has recurring roles in notable films.

(削除) 4. Precedent & Fairness Many actors with similar or lesser credentials already have Wikipedia articles. Deleting this article would be inconsistent with existing precedents and unfairly dismiss an actress actively working in major productions. Thus Lekha Prajapati meets WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG through multiple significant roles, substantial media coverage, and continued relevance in the Indian film industry. Deleting her article would be premature and inconsistent with Wikipedia’s existing standards. Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 08:01, 15 March 2025 (UTC) (削除ここまで)— Note to closing admin: Shubhamgawali1 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. Blocked for abusing multiple accounts and likely undisclosed paid editing.[reply ]

  • Delete: only few sources are not enough to eastablish notability guidelines, and the actress didn't play role in multiple significant (WP:NFO) films.Hellorld4 (talk) 10:08, 15 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    How are you taking NFO here since NFO is films related not the cast?
    3 popular web series, multiple music videos, one web show, and more than 3 films in supporting roles, I think thats the criteria for Wikipedia article of the actors.
    about the sources, I’ve added the most I could find. Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 10:19, 15 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Keep: The BLP clearly passes WP:NActor, which requires significant roles and not just LEAD roles. It also passes GNG as sources are secondary and reliable. Davidindia (talk) 13:54, 16 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Please supply a human answer, and not an AI-generated one. Geschichte (talk) 06:37, 20 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Geschichte (talk) Are you talking about my "Keep". Every word is written by me after carefully checking and doing research. Some words are copied from NActor... I am not sure where you get this idea that my post is AI generated. Unfortunately, many people, including many respected senior editors, are not spending enough time and are simply trying to delete pages... I have observed that many worthy pages suffered this fate! Please do show some faith in juniors! Davidindia (talk) 20:49, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please refrain from using an LLM to phrase your arguments here. Your own words, even in a language not native to you, carry more weight than those of a machine.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen×ばつ ☎ 13:38, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • weak keep: A non-trivial amount of coverage found in Indian media [30] this article isn't bad, while the rest are interviews, she does seem to be well-known. Oaktree b (talk) 21:56, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Delete. Fails to meet WP:NACTOR who did not play significant roles and I did not find any critical acclaim, achievement and full fledged review on any roles the subject played, in any secondary independent reliable sources. If anyone does find any such source, please let me know to review them. RangersRus (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    She has full recurring role in City of Dreams (TV series), and in 2 films as well, so NACTOR is already passed, significant coverage for few roles is in the media I’ve cited available. The bigg bull movie she has recurring role throughout film. Also Rafuchakkar throughout the series, so NACTOR can not be reason to delete. Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 08:16, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    You say She has full recurring role in City of Dreams (TV series) and yet not a single critical review on that page shows any mention or critique about her role? This is because it is not significant role. You have to prove that the roles she played were significant that got significant coverage, appreciation, and achievement. RangersRus (talk) 14:52, 25 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
    What about having played roles in multiple notable films and pan-India web-shows? Even though if they are not having entirely dedicated sourced, I think 100s of articles on Wikipedia about such actors can be found. I agree with she doesn’t have independently discussing source over her characters, but many about mentions and notability giving it her characters Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 10:29, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Delete - Even creator agrees that "she doesn’t have independently discussing source over her characters." Simply having significant roles is not enough. There still needs to be independent coverage. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Socialist Janata Dal (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

I couldn't find enough reliable independent sources with WP:SIGCOV to establish notability for this political party. I note that searching is tricky because socialist Janata Dal (where the adjective socialist describes Janata Dal) and Socialist Janata Dal (a splinter group of Janata Dal I think) are effectively the same thing to search engines! It is possible that there are decent sources not in English, and if they were added to the article I would willingly withdraw my nomination. I had previously redirected this article to List of Janata Dal breakaway parties but that has been widely contested by a COI editor and their related sock puppets in the past (see history), and now an IP user is reverting to the same poorly sourced material. Hence my nomination for deletion. I would support a redirect to List of Janata Dal breakaway parties but only if it were subject to extended-confirmed protection. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 14:08, 13 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:40, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:46, 28 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
MMI Narayana Multispeciality Hospital, Raipur (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Lacks Notability for a company/ Organisation Rahmatula786 (talk) 12:15, 13 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I've already added more news citations. Satipem (talk) 12:28, 13 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Can you please check now? Satipem (talk) 12:29, 13 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Keep: I've already added more citations about news. Satipem (talk) 12:50, 13 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:28, 20 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Analysis of the new sources will be appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GrabUp - Talk 13:25, 27 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Cords Cable Industries Limited (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 15:41, 8 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:34, 15 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GrabUp - Talk 21:35, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Ashiana Housing (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

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 should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI. Apart from that, activities like fundraising, profit reporting, new real estate project launches, etc., are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 15:18, 8 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GrabUp - Talk 21:50, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Tanks of Mumbai (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS  · JSTOR · TWL )

Non notable, list like article with no sources from 2009. Not notable as a list as no sources discussing about the topic of Tanks in Mumbai. Prodded by me and Bearian, was contested. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 10:45, 8 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:54, 15 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:55, 22 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Proposed deletions

[edit ]

Files for deletion

[edit ]

Category discussion debates

[edit ]

Template discussion debates

[edit ]

Redirects for deletion

[edit ]

MFD discussion debates

[edit ]

Other deletion discussions

[edit ]

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /