Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shubham Singh

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 speedy deletion (A7). (non-admin closure) AllyD (talk) 06:38, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shubham Singh

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

Non-notable politician, PRODs and Speedies (as an unsourced BLP) keep being repeatedly removed, but a search for sources does not bring up anything. The name is not uncommon, but when I search with additional keywords (ie, Janta) to try and narrow down I don't find anything. Not sure if it is really speedy-able, hence bringing to discussion. Please be careful when looking for sources, as there are hits for other Shubham Singhs who should not be confused with this person (ie, criminals, gangsters, murderers...) Mabalu (talk) 10:06, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails BASIC GNG and WP:NPOLITICIAN.FITINDIA (talk) 19:32, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete extremely low level political party operative.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:55, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 11:55, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 11:55, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A WP:SPA article by User:Being2shubham which makes no credible claim to notability: neither passing one's exams nor campaigning for a political party are anything other than mundane and trivial. Fails all biographical notability criteria. CSD A7 is appropriate and should not be impeded by disruptive editing by the article creator (and likely subject). AllyD (talk) 19:47, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete low level politician lacking rs coverage Atlantic306 (talk) 20:56, 2 April 2017 (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.