Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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]
Vaniya Agrawal (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 don't see it, I don't see how this passes WP:GNG, feels WP:ROUTINE. I just don't see anything special here. Govvy (talk) 11:12, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Anandpur (1703) (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)

There is fundamentally no WP:SIGCOV about this battle. The sources that mention it say that it occurred and what its result was, but there's essentially no more information than that. Much of the coverage uncovered at previous AfDs is either unreliable, or relates to different battles of Anandpur, of which there were many, including in the previous and following years. The topic is better covered as two sentences of background or aftermath in those articles. There is nothing to merge or redirect, as the only meaningful content was a copyright violation, and the title isn't a meaningful search term because of the parenthetical. Vanamonde93 (talk) 02:19, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(TL;DR)  The available material is so thin that wikipedia risks creating a chimeric historical event with dubious details in trying to write a supposedly encyclopedic article on the topic, as is seen in the current wikipedia article and the previous AFD discussion.
Details: The two cited sources treat the subject of the wikipedia article as the fourth battle of Anandpur, and the latter source combines discussion of the fourth and the fifth battle (which also was in 1703), devoting less than two sentences on the former (in a 1000+ pages tome). Other sources call it the Third battle of Anandpur, while again covering it cursorily. Yet others combine discussion of the numerous skirmishes around Anandpur in 1703-04 under the rubric of "The second battle of Anandpur" in a single sentence summary. I should note that all these sources are pretty borderline wrt WP:SCHOLARSHIP.
Grewal (2019), likely the only WP:HISTRS-compatible source among those listed so far, discusses the battle in 3 sentences without giving it a name and his description of the battle result (... many fighters were killed on both sides. On the following day, no one dared to attack.) contrasts with the "Sikh victory" declared by the wikipedia article. The battle date and strength of forces reported in the wikipedia article are also unsourced and dubious. That's illustrative of the risk we run when we scrape the barrel for material and try to write an article in a tertiary publication that is an order of magnitude longer than the space any reliable secondary source devotes to the topic. Abecedare (talk) 16:53, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Subhash Khanna (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)

My comment in the last AfD discussion was "Subject is middle author on a couple of highly-cited, highly-coauthored papers. I'm not seeing a pass of WP:NPROF C1. The journal editorship is of a new journal [1], which does not pass WP:NPROF C8. Little other sign of notability, and WP:TNT is relevant." I am less certain of TNT, but the rest still holds. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please, check out some research papers authored by him, please, guide me if I am wrong in quoting it, thanks a lot. IQR (talk) 20:09, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Meenal Choubey (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)

Mayors are not inherently notable under WP:NPOL. GrabUp - Talk 07:39, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5][6][7] [8] [9]

References

  1. ^ Bajpai, Shashank Shekhar (4 March 2025). "रायपुर महापौर मीनल चौबे ने संभाली कुर्सी, शहर के चहुंमुखी विकास का किया वादा". Nai Dunia (in Hindi). Retrieved 1 April 2025.
  2. ^ Marut raj (28 March 2025). "रायपुर में 4 नए फ्लाई ओवर और कामकाजी महिलाओं के लिए 3 हॉस्टल बनेंगे". Sootr (in Hindi). Retrieved 1 April 2025.
  3. ^ "RMC's 1.5k crore budget prioritises urban devpt". The Times of India. 29 March 2025. Retrieved 1 April 2025.
  4. ^ Hitavada, The (6 February 2025). "BJP's Minal Choubey pledges to prioritise basic amenities". The Hitavada. Retrieved 1 April 2025.
  5. ^ "Raipur: जानें कौन हैं मीनल चौबे, जिसे बीजेपी ने रायपुर नगर निगम से मेयर प्रत्याशी के लिये चुनावी रण में उतारा". Amar Ujala (in Hindi). 27 January 2025. Retrieved 2 April 2025.
  6. ^ Mallick, Avdhesh (28 March 2025). "Raipur Mayor Meenal Chaubey Presents ₹1529.53 Crore RMC Budget, Focus On Women Empowerment & Infrastructure". Free Press Journal. Retrieved 2 April 2025.
  7. ^ Behera, Partha Sarathi (1 March 2025). "Develop public facilities based on citizen input: Raipur mayor Meenal Chaubey". The Times of India. Retrieved 2 April 2025.
  8. ^ "Raipur mayor's oath-taking sparks debate over religious slogans". cgkhabar.com. 28 February 2025. Retrieved 6 April 2025.
  9. ^ तिवारी, पवन (15 February 2025). "raipur news people choose us for development know what meenal choubey said after the victory". Navbharat Times (in Hindi). Retrieved 6 April 2025.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Meenal Chaubey is the currently serving Mayor of Raipur, which is the capital city of Chhattisgarh, India. Holding the mayoral office of a state capital is a position of significant political importance and public interest. Her election has been covered by multiple reliable and independent news sources such as The Times of India, NDTV, and Hindustan Times, which establish her notability under Wikipedia's general notability guidelines (GNG) and WP:POLITICIAN. Furthermore, her political career, public engagements, and influence on local governance are well-documented, making her a notable figure in Indian municipal politics. Deletion of such a page would remove verifiable and encyclopedic information about a currently elected public official.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesurajsahu (talkcontribs)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:22, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topic: India Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. WP:NPOL also states mayors do not inherently fail to meet notability either. WP:POLOUTCOMES notes that regionally significant mayors tend to survive. Raipur is a capital city of a province, the 45th largest city in India, and in 2025 (at the time of her election) has an estimated population of 1.5 million. Honestly, this would be like arguing a 21st-century Mayor of Boston is not notable.--Mpen320 (talk) 21:00, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    A 21st century mayor of Boston is not inherently notable. NPOL#1 makes provisions for international, national and state-level (for countries that use that system). Nothing there is made for cities or local government areas. The mayor of Aba or Lagos (both in Nigeria) are not inherently notable. Now, for NPOL#2, the sources here are not independent of the subject neither do they give in-depth coverage of him, so, it fails that too. If population of a city is now the basis of notability, an RfC should be opened for it, until then, I don’t think that this !vote is policy based. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 21:17, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I consider much of this to be a non-sequitur, but I will assume good faith. My response was primarily meant to be additive to what others have said. I don't need to be the Xth person to type the words "meets GNG" when I can point out HOW I agree with people who have made this point (in this case she as a regionally important local official can meet GNG as most in her position are able to). I perhaps could have made that clearer that I find the sources found by others to be sufficient combined with the probability of even more such coverage existing. Also, in my experience, these kinds of replies to everyone with whom you disagree in the same AfD tend to backfire. --Mpen320 (talk) 23:16, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Khyati Madaan (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 subject does not fulfill the criteria given in WP:NFILMMAKER. Insufficient in-depth coverage from credible sources. She has only experience in marketing campaigns. Bakhtar40 (talk) 14:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stonex India (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 sources cited here lack WP:CORPDEPTH. Lack significant coverage from reliable sources. [5], [6]. These are Indian Business Listing Directories. Others are either self published or not reliable. Bakhtar40 (talk) 14:04, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coinswitch (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 company does not meet the notability criteria per WP:CORP due to a lack of significant coverage as required by WP:SIGCOV. The sources mentioned are trivial mentions and promotional in nature, failing to provide the depth needed to establish notability. Veeranshi Jha (talk) 10:52, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Agree with the nominator. I have found no in-depth coverage of coinswitch in reliable sources. Largely seems to be another generic crypto exchange this time focused on the market in India.
Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 22:13, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Saying 'no in-depth coverage in reliable sources' is incorrect, what is true is that this is crowded by routine coverage, press releases and sources under WP:ILLCON. Money ≠ notability, though this is India's largest crypto exchange. Along with Coinswitch mainly being known for its products which have received sustained coverage meeting WP:NPRODUCT, there is much coverage to support NCORP criteria. Forbes article, The Economic Times, Mint, are some examples. Hmr (talk) 00:06, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Vikas Kapoor (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 previous nominated and deleted. It was then recreated. However the issue still seems to be there. Cannot find independent significant coverage about the person himself to indicate he is anything more than a run-of-the-MILL CEO. Imcdc Contact 06:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Atul Tandon (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 only significant coverage I'm seeing does not appear to be independent. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Air India data breach (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:NEVENT. Should be merged to Air India. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Lots of businesses have experienced data breaches that have been covered in the news, a separate page is not needed for just a few short paragraphs. Reywas92Talk 18:16, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Murder of Neha Hiremath (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 NEVENT, not enough sustained or in depth coverage to prove notability. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:24, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In Santa Cruz, Diagnosed Homesick (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)

WP:GNGThe poem gets no in-depth discussion. It only gets mention on one website as having won a prize (no indication of what the other prizes were for) and all other mentions of it online mirror this article. The author herself may well be notable and I mentioned her poetry awards there, with a cited source. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 08:35, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mahroos Siddiquee Nadim (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 football player. Sources appear insufficient for establishing notability, and there's no indication that subject is notable enough for a standalone article. Fails WP:NATHLETE. CycloneYoris talk! 02:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vijay Nahar (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)

Orignal creator of this article was blocked for WP:COI and WP:PROMO. This persons fails WP:GNG as well as WP:AUTHOR, due to lack of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Also most of the sources on this article are not about him, hence checked carefully. It may be created for undisclosed payments because this article creator also created articles on his multiple books which are also nothing more than promotion. Fails WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR TheSlumPanda (talk) 02:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, India, and Rajasthan. TheSlumPanda (talk) 02:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep
    The article on Vijay Nahar should be retained. There is sufficient coverage in a wide range of independent and reliable sources, satisfying Wikipedia’s General Notability Guideline for authors, historians, and public figures. His work spans historical biographies, political commentary, and education-focused literature. Below is a list of significant sources that discuss his contributions:
    === Media & News Coverage: ===
    === Literary & Historical Commentary: ===
    === Library Catalogs & Book Listings: ===
    ----These references clearly demonstrate both the coverage and influence of Vijay Nahar’s work. While the Wikipedia article might benefit from improvements in structure, formatting, and inline citations, the subject himself meets Wikipedia's notability threshold. Therefore, the article should be improved, not dele Gujjar.rudraa (talk) 19:52, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Almost all sources are not about this subject. Some are about maharana Pratap, or other are about modi or vasundra raje, also the #2 TOI article is a reliable source but that talks more about the book written by him. And please remind that online listing of books for purchase like Amazon doesn’t confer notability. TheSlumPanda (talk) 04:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Vijay Nahar is an Indian author and historian known for his biographical and historical works on notable Indian political figures and Rajput kings. His book Swarnim Bharat ke Swapndrishtha Narendra Modi has been referenced in multiple media outlets, including The Sunday Guardian, for its early commentary on Narendra Modi’s developmental vision and personal life aspects, including his marriage, which was highlighted during political discourse (The Sunday Guardian, Amar Ujala).
    Nahar’s biography of Vasundhara Raje, Vasundhara Raje aur Viksit Rajasthan, is among the first dedicated publications on her political career and is noted in news profiles (Jansatta). His contributions to historical research include books on Samrat Bhoj Parmar, Mihir Bhoj, and Rao Akheraj Songara, which have been cited in literary platforms such as Sahitya Kunj and Sahitya Nama, and are among the few comprehensive modern works available on these historical figures (Sahitya Kunj, Udaipur Kiran).
    In the context of Maharana Pratap, Nahar's writings have been used in regional discourse to support the view that Pratap was born in Pali, Rajasthan—challenging the traditionally cited location of Kumbhalgarh attributed to Colonel Tod (Bhaskar, Samvad). His contributions have also been recognized through awards and coverage in local media outlets, emphasizing his role in historical interpretation and education.
    While online listings like Amazon do not independently confer notability, they help identify the range and accessibility of his publications. Furthermore, his books have been featured in school libraries in Rajasthan, according to a report by The Times of India (TOI). Gujjar.rudraa (talk) 03:49, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    His book on narendra modi got media coverage like 1, 2. While the sunday guardian have only passing mention at last which is not enough. But if we talk about notability of this subject them i am still inclined toward deletion because of lack of Significant coverage about him in independent sources rather than sticking only on his modi book.TheSlumPanda (talk) 05:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    == Sources supporting notability ==
    Most of the sources cited to support the notability of Vijay Nahar are from Hindi-language newspapers and online publications. However, these are established and widely circulated media outlets in India, such as Dainik Bhaskar, Amar Ujala, Rajasthan Patrika, Punjab Kesari, Jansatta, and the Hindi edition of Times of India. These outlets are considered reliable sources under Wikipedia guidelines for regional and vernacular coverage.
    The references include interviews, book reviews, coverage of public recognitions and awards, listings of published works, and inclusion of his books in institutional libraries. Several sources document his contributions as a biographer of public figures like Narendra Modi, Vasundhara Raje, and Maharana Pratap. Many of these sources offer English summaries or have accessible translations. Gujjar.rudraa (talk) 14:49, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Adhunik Bharat Ke Brahmarshi Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya (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)

Orignal creator of this article was blocked for WP:COI and WP:PROMO. This article is also nothing more than a promotion. This book is not significantly covered by secondary sources in depth.Clearly fails WP:NBOOK. TheSlumPanda (talk) 02:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vasundhara Raje Aur Viksit Rajasthan (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)

Orignal creator of this article was blocked for WP:COI and WP:PROMO. This article is also nothing more than a promotion. This book is not significantly covered by secondary sources in depth. Only source i found is the Dainik bhaskar, which is actually not about the book and it is about the launch of book (as it is about chief minister so it got some attention). Clearly fails WP:NBOOK. TheSlumPanda (talk) 01:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Narendra Chaudhary (soldier) (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 meet criteria for notability, reliability, or reliable sources. The single English language source is of extremely poor quality. Audrey Woolf (talk) 00:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I.I.M.U.N. (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 to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for corporations, as explained in WP:NCORP and WP:ORGCRIT. Charlie (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs for this article:
Northeast India International Travel Mart (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)

Is clearly WP:PROMO. Little to know sources talking about it. Fails WP:GNG and all of the sources are press releases Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Northeast India International Tourism Mart: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Nano City (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)

Proposal in 2006 to build a city in India for nanotechnology work. The project never went anywhere and was formally cancelled in 2010. The only sources are two 2006 news articles about the proposals, and two articles when it was cancelled. It is very hard to justify this page as notable, particularly as there is no evidence that this cancelled proposal had any impact -- fails WP:Notability means impact. Ldm1954 (talk) 23:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indus 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)

Subject does not appear to meet the WP:NORG. The only source currently in the article is the organizations website, while a cursory search didn't come up with much better. Let'srun (talk) 23:17, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Farooq (book) (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 removed some unverified and unsourced content from the page. It was already a stub, and now it's even shorter. Deletion seems to be the most appropriate option.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 01:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are some references on the Uzbek wiki (uz:Al-faruq) that look promising, but I can only access this one. I've added some context. It could be notable; I lean towards keep. I realized that those sources are considered unreliable by the nominator who removed them recently. Would be useful to know why they are unreliable, but I trust your judgment since I can't read them. Reconrabbit 19:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Reconrabbit: I initially added the sources while working on the Bibliography of Shibli Nomani. Although they are reliable, they are not directly relevant to the text, which is why I chose to remove them. However, if you find them useful, you're welcome to incorporate them. There is no shortage of credible sources available online. The primary concern is that, in its current state, this article does not meet the standards required for a standalone entry.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 20:19, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The linked source from the Journal of Islamic Studies and Humanities dedicates about two pages to this book, which led me to believe it was worthwhile to use it. If it does not meet the standards for an article on a book, it could be redirected back to Shibli Nomani until someone compiles more substantial information. Reconrabbit 20:38, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hyderabad Heroes (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:NSPORT with very limited WP:SIGCOV Agent 007 (talk) 17:21, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It has just been created. Within the next couple of days, more details and sources will be added. It’s foolish to list it for deletion without giving it time to be completed. OCDD (talk) 06:56, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Should be completed in draft space. Draftify Mn1548 (talk) 07:55, 5 April 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. Sandstein 16:40, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shyam Sunder Vyas (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 almost 10 years ago and till now the referencing of article hasn’t improved. I also removed two bare urls from this article. On WP:BEFORE, i didn't found any sources about the subject except this[1], which is repository data and dosent establish notability. This subject fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG TheSlumPanda (talk) 15:00, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Mahotsav, Amrit (21 January 2025). "Shyam Sunder Vyas". Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav, Ministry of Culture, Government of India. Retrieved 4 April 2025.
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.
Omaxe (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. WP:BEFORE is all about new project launches, funding news, winning government contracts., etc - all are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 13:00, 4 April 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 14:10, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Medica Hospitals (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. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed. An alternative to deletion could be merging with Manipal Hospitals. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:55, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:20, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fortis Healthcare (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 government approvals, profit/financial reporting, capacity expansion news, acquisition news, partnership news etc., are merely routine coverage WP:ROUTINE, regardless of where they are published. WP:ATD - Manipal Hospitals. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:53, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:20, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Shekinah TV (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 am nominating this article for deletion as it Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable independent sources; WP:Before search did not find sufficient sourcing. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 15:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Darshana TV (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 am nominating this article for deletion as it Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable independent sources; WP:Before search did not find sufficient sourcing. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 15:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Keep the article and improve the references. Channel is available in most DTH (except SUN) and most Cable aggregators.
Anish Viswa 04:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to the points raised: Availability doesn't satisfy WP:GNG's requirement for significant coverage in independent sources (see WP:NEXIST). The suggestion to improve sources falls under WP:HEY; the key is demonstrating such sources actually exist, which the WP:BEFORE search did not confirm. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 07:10, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 23:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
Darshana.tv
No Website of the channel Yes Self-published Yes Only about it. No
Keralatv.in.
Yes Yes Page not found. 404 ? Unknown
Bharatchannels.com
No clue. Yes Yes, only about it. ? Unknown
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

A search doesn't offer anything either. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 19:54, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harvest TV (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 am nominating this article for deletion as it Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable independent sources; WP:Before search did not find sufficient sourcing. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jeevan TV (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 am nominating this article for deletion as it Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable independent sources; WP:Before search did not find sufficient sourcing. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 15:32, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Keep the article and improve the references. Channel is available in most DTH and most Cable aggregators.
Anish Viswa 04:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to the points raised: Availability doesn't satisfy WP:GNG's requirement for significant coverage in independent sources (see WP:NEXIST). The suggestion to improve sources falls under WP:HEY; the key is demonstrating such sources actually exist, which the WP:BEFORE search did not confirm. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 07:14, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Goodness (TV channel) (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 am nominating this article for deletion as it Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable independent sources; WP:Before search did not find sufficient sourcing. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 15:41, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thapaswini Poonacha (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)

Declined G4. Non-notable actress. This version of the article is drastically different from the previous version which was deleted in 2022. Although it's still in very poor shape, and would need to be completely rewritten if kept. Fails WP:NACTOR. CycloneYoris talk! 21:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response to AfD Discussion: Thapaswini Poonacha
I oppose the deletion of this article on the grounds that Thapaswini Poonacha meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria for actors (WP:NACTOR) and has received significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources.
1. Notability as an Actress
Thapaswini Poonacha has been featured in multiple Kannada films, including:
Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – Available on JioCinema
Gajarama (2025) – Upcoming release on February 7, 2025
Mr. Jack – Upcoming, co-starring Guru Nandan
Rukmini Vasantha – Upcoming, co-starring Shree Mahadev
She has received media attention for her performances and won the Chittara Promising Star Award, which is a notable recognition in the Kannada film industry.
2. Significant Media Coverage
Multiple independent and reliable sources have covered her career and achievements, demonstrating significant coverage beyond passing mentions:
Times of India:
"I do my research before signing a film"
"Not about numbers, want to do memorable movies"
"Roles have to make my soul happy"
The New Indian Express:
"I have no interest in chasing attention"
Kannada Prabha:
"Thapaswini Poonacha: I have no interest in chasing attention"
Hindustan Times Kannada:
"Thapaswini Poonacha in Christmas photoshoot"
These sources demonstrate that Thapaswini Poonacha is consistently covered in reputable media, indicating her notability as an actress and public figure.
3. Business and Coffee Industry Recognition
In addition to her acting career, she is a certified coffee cup tester and runs a coffee business in Coorg. This has been discussed in interviews and media coverage, adding to her notability beyond acting.
4. Conclusion
Thapaswini Poonacha meets WP:NACTOR by virtue of:
✅ Multiple roles in notable Kannada films
✅ Award recognition (Chittara Promising Star Award)
✅ Significant, independent media coverage
✅ Additional recognition in the coffee industry
Given the multiple reliable sources and her growing career in Kannada cinema, deletion is not justified. If improvements are needed, I encourage a rewrite instead of deletion. Akashmdp (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
Agree on multiple roles in notable Kannada films, which is enough for a standalone page, but would you happen to have a source for the award, by any chance? -Mushy Yank. 17:40, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seen the Youtube video. Added it. A better source might be needed for that, but as notability does not depend on that point (but on her 2 roles), not urgent. Advising you no to repeat the same things nor add long walls of text here or on the page. -Mushy Yank. 18:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did you ask AI to ask if the article should be deleted or not? That might explain why Kannada industry became coffee industry. DareshMohan (talk) 18:06, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: 2 significant roles in (2) notable films (the second has no page yet but at least 3 bylined reviews [see page]) have her meet the requirements for WP:NACTRESS. I have cleaned up the page. -Mushy Yank. 17:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep – Thapaswini Poonacha meets WP:NACTRESS by having significant roles in two notable films:
    Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – Recognized and covered in mainstream Kannada media.
    Gajarama (2025) – While the film does not yet have its own Wikipedia page, it has received at least three bylined reviews from reliable sources.
    Additionally, she has been profiled in multiple independent, reliable sources, including:
    Times of India (article)
    New Indian Express (article)
    Kannada Prabha (article)
    Hindustan Times Kannada (article)
    Her acting career and coffee business have been independently covered, reinforcing her notability beyond just press releases or promotional content. The page has been cleaned up to meet Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing guidelines.
    Thus, per WP:GNG and WP:NACTRESS, the article should be kept. Akashmdp (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
    The Kannada Prabha piece is more interview. The Vinay Lokesh piece is also interview. These aren't nearly enough, IMHO. I don't see a single presented source which isn't routine entertainment news, mostly quotes. No direct detailing at all. To Akashmdp, repeating your bullet points over and over doesn't make your argument any stronger. You may be convinced, but you need to convince the other editors in this discussion. BusterD (talk) 18:14, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete User:Akashmdp is the page creator AND a paid contributor to this page. As for the sources already applied on the page, cite #2 (Asianet Suvarna News) admits it's a Kannada translation of The Times of India link (cite #1). Both consist entirely of identical quotes from the subject. Interviews do not count towards GNG. The two movie reviews are both (parenthetical) bare mentions, but do confirm the single role. Cite #5 is also an interview with a few bits of routine industry news. The photoshoot linked above is five pics of her in same outfit next to quotes from the actress. If this is all an avowed digital marketing professional with 7+ years of experience in the industry can bring, it's not very impressive to me. BusterD (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    For full disclosure, I was the administrator who declined the speedy deletion tag earlier. BusterD (talk) 17:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Meets WP:NACTRESS and WP:GNG.
    I would like to address the concerns raised by User:BusterD regarding notability and sources.
    1. Significant Roles in Multiple Notable Films
      • Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – A commercially released Kannada film with media coverage.
      • Gajarama (2025) – Upcoming film, already receiving pre-release coverage.
      • Mr. Jack & Rukmini Vasantha – Both announced, with media mentions. Under WP:NACTRESS, an actor needs two significant roles in notable films, which she meets.
    2. Coverage in Reliable, Independent Sources
      • Times of India: Multiple interviews and feature stories.
      • New Indian Express: Independent reporting on her career.
      • Hindustan Times (Kannada): Coverage of her work.
      • Kannada Prabha: Career analysis and industry perspectives. Response to the Source Criticism:
      • The Times of India article is a primary source, but it is still independent and features her career insights.
      • The Asianet Suvarna News article may translate TOI but does not invalidate other sources.
      • Movie reviews confirm her roles, fulfilling minimum WP:NACTRESS requirements.
      • The New Indian Express piece is not just an interview; it provides analysis of her trajectory.
      • Photoshoot coverage, while not the strongest evidence, still indicates media attention.
    3. Regarding Paid Editing Allegations
      • While User:Akashmdp may have created the page, the subject’s notability stands independently.
      • Wikipedia has a system for COI disclosures, but that does not automatically invalidate an article’s merits.
      • Even if a paid editor initiated the page, the subject’s career must be evaluated separately from who added the content.
    4. Conclusion
      • Thapaswini Poonacha meets both WP:GNG and WP:NACTRESS based on her coverage and career milestones.
      • The article has been cleaned up to remove promotional tone and improve sourcing.
      • If further citations or refinements are needed, that can be worked on, but outright deletion is unnecessary.
    Thus, the article should be kept. Akashmdp (talk) 18:12, 3 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
    Now you're screaming. You have made your argument. Let others speak. Mushy Yank can be helpful here. Consult with them. BusterD (talk) 18:16, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 20:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Passes Wp:GNG and Wp:NACTRESS. Multiple significant roles in notable movies and multiple significant coverage in WP:RS, both are available. Zuck28 (talk) 01:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep: As per above discussion and my search on the subject find this: [12], [13], [14] B-Factor (talk) 12:41, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Weak Keep
    Thank you, B-Factor, for your input. The references you provided—Times of India, Cinema Express, and The New Indian Express—are credible sources that establish Thapaswini Poonacha’s notability as an actress in Kannada cinema.
    These sources provide coverage of her career, film roles, and interviews, which meet Wikipedia’s General Notability Guidelines (GNG). Additionally, her role in upcoming films like Gajarama shows ongoing relevance.
    I believe the page should be retained, but I am open to improving it by adding more citations or restructuring content for better compliance with Wikipedia standards.
    Looking forward to further discussion. Akashmdp (talk) 17:47, 4 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
    @Akashmdp Is your !vote Keep or Weak Keep? (You don't need to repeat identical arguments over and over, even if it's to thank someone -we understood your point, I guess-, which is perfectly fine, though) Inviting you to "remove" your "Weak Keep" above (with strikethrough) (So that it appears Weak Keep) if your !vote (the only thing that should be bolded (theorically :D) in a !vote) is indeed Keep. And Gajarama is NOT an upcoming film, mind you. It was released in February and has received multiple reviews in reliable media outlets, this being one of the main arguments (with her other significant role) in favour of retention of the page. -Mushy Yank. 18:53, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, thank you for your kind suggestion. Yes, I was confused. Gajarams is released. I am sorry for that. Should I update that in the page? Also, there is no option to remove keep with strike. Should I send new reply regarding that? Akashmdp (talk) 15:55, 6 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
It’s OK, done it for you. The film is clearly indicated as released in the article so there’s no problem. -Mushy Yank. 17:57, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much. If you don’t mind, can you tell me what should I do next? Is the article live? Nomination header is still there. Akashmdp (talk) 18:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
Just be patient :D. The discussion will take place until April 9 at least. The nomination tag will remain until the discussion is closed and a consensus (to retain/delete/redirect/draftify) is clear. Nothing to do in particular here; feel free to list new sources on the talk page if you find some and think they are useful to expand the page. Best, -Mushy Yank. 18:58, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime, if you wish and can, you could upload a quality photograph of this actress if you can find one that corresponds to the guidelines explained in Wikipedia:Images. Be particularly mindful of copyright and legal issues if you can find one. Please note that the potential insertion of an image is totally unrelated to notability questions and that it will not change a thing in the current discussion. -Mushy Yank. 19:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. How long does it take to index on google? Akashmdp (talk) 08:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
From their frequent use of the phrase, it appears Akashmdp gets paid when the page indexes. This was not written by an LLM, at least. BusterD (talk) 18:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Passes WP:NACTRESS who has worked as female lead in two films that have been released. Page needs to be improved though with secondary independent reliable sources. Sources with interviews are not independent of the subject. RangersRus (talk) 15:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: at the suggestion of another editor, I ran GPTZero on User:Akashmdp's extended posts in this discussion. They each came up 100% LLM created. BusterD (talk) 18:19, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes I had used LLM to improvise my article since my english is not upto the par. So much allegations on me, I am the friend of Thapaswini, I am marketer by profession but doesn’t mean I am charging Thapaswini. I can provide any proof that she is my friend. I am solely doing this for a good will. If you insist me to add COI paid or something, I really don’t mind until it doesn’t affect our article. And I still stand on my stance that I am not being paid. In future I might write an article which will be paid I hope, that time I would definitely mention it. And this is my first article and I am still a noob. I would be expecting you people help rather than defending it. @Mushy Yank@BusterD please check this out.
    Thank you Akashmdp (talk) 06:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
  • Delete - The "two" significant roles argument is good as long as there is significant coverage on the subject themself. Simply having sources verifying a role is not enough. The sourcing here is no better than it was in the first two deletion discussions (mentions, NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable). Apparently there are two other films they are involved in. Maybe when there is more coverage of them there will be more coverage of this subject. Until then, it is a case of TOOSOON. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Aside from the LLVM generated content, the views of experienced editors are split between keeping and deleting. Another week getting views of other editors is needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per above. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 14:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unsure - whilst it is true she’s been an actor in two films, it’s not really clear that these are notable even in the context of Indian cinema where it appears more than 100 Kannada language films are released per year. It is true there are reviews from Indian newspapers, but these suggest that the critical reviews were not good. It seems plausible to me that Indian actors might only be considered notable if they’ve been in movies that are particularly notable. The use of LLM and closeness to the subject strongly suggests that the !keep votes above are clouding the issue. JMWt (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: passes WP:NACTOR (barely, but still...). The subject also passes WP:GNG. The sourcing appears good - at least two of them are WP:RS, and the coverage is significant enough to warrant an article. I agree that the page needs to be improved, though.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable sources do not necessary mean significant coverage. Which references show the person meets WP:BASIC as that is still a requirement given the WP:NACTOR guideline says " meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included."--CNMall41 (talk) 16:13, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify or Delete until the release of her next film Mr. Jack per WP:TOO EARLY. Given that the film was already shooting in January 2025, a release could happen in 2025. Regarding COI, I or any other editor can blank the draft and rewrite it. The issue I have with keeping the article is that what if her next film doesn't release, will she be notable? I had trouble sourcing her second unreleased film based on English sources [15]. DareshMohan (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pathankot Campaign (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 describes a 1775 clash between Sikh Misls but fails to show its a distinct, notable event beyond skirmishes already covered in articles like Kanhaiya Misl, Bhangi Misl, or Sikh Confederacy. "Pathankot Campaign" isn’t a recognized term in historical scholarship, also WP:RS don’t treat it as a standalone event separate from typical inter-Misl strife. It leans on a narrow set of sources, like Gandhi (1999) and Gupta (1939), lack the mainstream weight or specificity to confirm details. NXcrypto Message 10:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ahluwalia–Ramgarhia War (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)

There is no conflict such as the "Ahluwalia–Ramgarhia War", sources do not support it and provide no significant coverage to a conflict under this name. This article is a part of a series of fringe pseudohistorical articles created for ethno-religious POV pushing. Srijanx22 (talk) 05:06, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete sources exist that proves the content is genuine. But the article title is indeed pseudohistory. The available content could be merged into any of the parent articles. Academic sources lacks covering this as an individual war.Borax || (talk to Borax) 14:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. AlvaKedak (talk) 10:22, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - The coverage in the sources is not enough and none of the sources support this neologism made up by the author "Ahluwalia - Ramgarhia war" , in fact sources do not even support that this was a war, sources at best refer to it as skirmishes and do not provide significant coverage to them. Anyway given the author's history of making copyvio, I doubt this article is free of it. The relevant details (not closely paraphrased) can be covered at the articles of relevant personalities. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 15:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:32, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mokokchung Times (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)

Challenging draftification. I found no significant coverage of the website from any reliable sources. There are passing mentions, but they are not enough to meet SIGCOV. Additionally, no policy states that being a news organization automatically makes it notable. GrabUp - Talk 11:45, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We have very little Wikipedia representation in Nagaland (Northeast India) and I looked at this newspaper, and right now it seems fine.
Here are some article headlines which I see right now in this newspaper. All of them seem appropriate to me to cite to develop Wikipedia articles on related topics:
Bluerasberry (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep In accordance with WP:NMEDIA, dailies such as Mokokchung Times are assumed significant if they extensively circulate and contain a known history of independent reporting. Asking for major secondary coverage creates an unrealistic expectation—media does not cover others. Removing this page has the risk of enabling systemic bias (WP:BIAS) against regional media. Agree with (Bluerasberry)Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:49, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:29, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Arunachal Times (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)

Challenging draftification. I found no significant coverage of the website from any reliable sources. There are passing mentions, but they are not enough to meet SIGCOV. Additionally, no policy states that being a news organization automatically makes it notable. GrabUp - Talk 11:44, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: In accordance with WP:NMEDIA, dailies such as Arunachal Times are assumed significant if they extensively circulate and contain a known history of independent reporting. Asking for major secondary coverage creates an unrealistic expectation—media does not cover others. Removing this page has the risk of enabling systemic bias (WP:BIAS) against regional media. You cannot judge dailies using WP:GNG as dailies themselves are the source of 3rd party material. Other dailies don't usually write about each other Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:29, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - searching on Google Books reveal that plenty of works reference this newspaper. South Asia and China: Engagement in the Twenty-First Century has ample commentary about the editorial positions of the newspaper on Indo-China issues. Mass Media of India -2004 lists it as one of the principal dailies in the state. The sole daily in Arunachal Pradesh listed in Press in India, vol. 33. "Arunachal Times was published from the state with Vijay Kumar Nath as the chief editor and Taso Grayu as the editor - cum- publisher . Kumar joined in August 1989 and ultimately took over as its editor in December 2003. Its popularity grew day by day . From letter composing , the daily introduced offset in 1996 and web offset on 2nd December 2008."([24]). In 2014-2015 Arunchal Times had the second-largest advertisement payments from central Ministry of Information and Broadcasting of all Arunchal newspapers ([25]). "In July this year, Tongam Rina, a leading journalist and associate editor of Arunachal Times was shot from close range while she was leaving the office." (The Telegraph), "On July 15, 2012, the well-known investigative journalist and associate editor of the Arunachal Times was shot by unknown gunmen as she entered..." (IFJ). "Arunachal Pradesh chief minister Nabam Tuki has enquired about the progress of investigation into the recent attacks on The Arunachal Times office" (ToI). Etc, etc. It almost feels like WP:BEFORE was not performed before bringing this to AfD. --Soman (talk) 01:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aditi Saigal (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 is a case of Wp:TOOSOON. Just one film as acting career and one ep for that she received some press coverage. Other than that she is daughter of singer and actor parents but notability is not inherited. Fails wp:NACTOR and Wp:NMUSIC as well. Zuck28 (talk) 11:01, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not all individuals featured in Forbes necessarily meet the eligibility threshold for a standalone Wikipedia article.
    The subject must first satisfy the notability criteria outlined in Wikipedia's WP:Notability guidelines as a prerequisite for inclusion.
    Zuck28 (talk) 14:23, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Notability is not established per WP:NACTOR, WP:MUSICBIO nor WP:GNG. The sourcing consists of standard PR type promo that one would see for any emerging actor with a press agent, including Forbes, which is not significant coverage, it's simply a photo of her with a caption mentioning her name, thus trivial. The Forbes "profile" link above is more standard PR written by "Forbes Staff", (it does not even have a by-line). I agree with the nom that this is a case of WP:TOOSOON. Perhaps in a few more years this emerging actor will become notable, but at this time, one acting role, Spotify "fans" and famous parents is not enough. Netherzone (talk) 15:46, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does have a byline and in my view counts as one piece of significant reliable sources coverage. Another reliable bylined piece in the Hindu here, another bylined piece here, leaning Keep for WP:GNG rather than WP:NACTOR imvAtlantic306 (talk) 20:50, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Untitled S. S. Rajamouli 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 film title, just started filming, and anticipated release date in 2027. Nothing notable about the production and references are all churnalism, routine, or WP:NEWSORGINDIA. I do not see a redirect as an option as it has twice been removed based on the history. CNMall41 (talk) 06:01, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: This article is premature as the film is still in the early stages of production and lacks a confirmed title. The current sources primarily offer routine production updates and do not demonstrate the significant notability required for a standalone article at this stage. Creating a full article now risks violating WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTALBALL, as details about the film are likely to evolve. While the involvement of notable figures is acknowledged, Wikipedia articles require more than just anticipation to warrant inclusion. Deletion is recommended until the film progresses further, has a definitive title, and receives substantial coverage establishing its notability.Aditi's Voice (talk) 10:18, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: filming has started; notable cast, crew and director; a lot of coverage about production. At worst, redirect (or draftify). Opposed to deletion. -Mushy Yank. 15:03, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to SSMB29, the film's tentative title. It is noteworthy that the director's previous film's tentative title was so famous that it became the actual title, which is likely not the case for this film however. DareshMohan (talk) 15:45, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Per nom and WP:TOOSOON. Sources are mostly about leaked scene and others are on casting, and other routine news. Not notable yet. I was leaning to vote draftify but very likely the page will be moved back again right away to mainspace unless an administrator can put a move lock to it. If a move lock can be done, please let me know and I can change my vote to draftify. RangersRus (talk) 19:39, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Aditi's Voice:, you need to bold your vote. RangersRus (talk) 19:46, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The title should not be the criteria to redirect or delete, as it has begun filming, is notable and has wide media coverage. Jayanthkumar123 (talk) 5:33, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Best Regards (CP) 07:48, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Battle of Manupur (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 battle; article is cobbled together from passing mentions in various sources and padded out with the "background" and "aftermath" sections. Sources that do exist do not properly verify the content. For example, the date of 10 March 1748 is cited to a book that only says "In a battle fought near Sirhind early in 1748 Qamruddin received a fatal wound but his son Muin ul-Mulk defeated Ahmad Shah Abdali with the support of Safdar Jang." Indian campaign of Ahmad Shah Durrani is a possible redirect target, but I'm not sure it's a good one, and it may be better just to delete this. If redirected, request that the closing admin delete and redirect, as similar articles have been deleted for copyvio reasons and these are frequent sockfarm targets. asilvering (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While I agree with your other nominations, I disagree with this one and feel Manupur is more relevant. I've seen more significant sources cover it, page could generally be improved though, no doubt. Here's some sources:
[26] [27] [28] Noorullah (talk) 18:59, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Just fyi, we usually use the bolded word "keep" to oppose AfDs.) -- asilvering (talk) 19:24, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed, thanks. Noorullah (talk) 00:40, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Eluka Majaka (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)

Notable director (his 75th film) and notable cast, so why are there no reliable reviews? A search in Telugu (or English for that matter) surprisingly yields nothing [29]. No reliable reviews or other reliable sources apart from the single sources already on the article. The old sources that used to be on the article and a WP:BEFORE yielded: [30] [31] [32] [33]. This is not a pre-2010 film, it is a 2016 film, hence it needs more sources.

Note several films by the same director lack articles including his immediate previous film (see the director's filmography). Note: I support a redirect to Relangi Narasimha Rao#Filmography, where the same source about this film is also there. DareshMohan (talk) 01:03, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This isn't his first Telugu film not to be remade in Kannada or that wasn't a remake.
He has three other such films like that:
  1. Apparao Ki Oka Nela Thappindi (2001)
  2. Preminchukunnam Pelliki Randi (2004)
  3. Appu Chesi Pappu Koodu (2008)
  4. Oo Antava Maava Oo Ooo Antava Maavaa (2023) DareshMohan (talk) 13:33, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! Will amend my comment (that was written in a very confusing way, on top of this). -Mushy Yank. 17:11, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
Kattumaram (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)

Not Notable. concerns regarding notability and verifiability, as outlined in Wikipedia's content policies. For a film to be deemed notable, it must receive significant coverage from independent, reliable sources. While Kattumaram has been reviewed by several outlets, the depth and prominence of this coverage are limited. For instance, Asian Movie Pulse provides a review that, although positive, does not constitute the extensive coverage required to establish notability. Similarly, BollySpice.com offers a review, but its reach and influence are not substantial enough to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Additionally, the film's listing on platforms like IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes, which include brief synopses and user-generated content, do not serve as independent, reliable sources for establishing notability. Furthermore, the article's reliance on such sources may violate Wikipedia's verifiability policy, which mandates that information be backed by reputable, third-party publications. Without substantial, independent coverage, the article does not meet the criteria set forth in Wikipedia's notability guidelines for films, making it a candidate for deletion. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 01:33, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+Technically a WP:NFILM pass for another reason: screened >5 years after release (released in June 2019) https://birminghamindianfilmfestival.co.uk/kattumaram-catamaran/ and https://londonindianfilmfestival.co.uk/kattumaram-catamaran/ and the Global Indian stories source seems acceptable too.-Mushy Yank. 12:15, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. "For a film to be deemed notable, it must receive significant coverage from independent, reliable sources." Notability is not one-size-fits-all. This is a film and there are thousands of films produced globally that do not get to be reviewed by mainstream media (The New York Times, The Guardian, Variety, etc.). More often than not, the only reviews for a film will be found in niche publications. There are even film blogs and websites that are considered reliable sources because they are recognized within the film industry. Kattumaram was released in film festivals. It was included in Channel 4's annual Indian cinema showcase in 2020. It was a special screening at Wesleyan University in 2021. Six years after its premiere, it continues to be included in academic film events. Frameline is the Frameline Film Festival and a legitimate, reliable source for films with non-heterosexual subjects. The Hindu is a reliable newspaper. The New Indian Express is an edition of The Indian Express, which is a reliable source. Now Toronto (Now) is a reliable Canadian newspaper. The Times of India article is an interview with the filmmaker and from what I saw in it, is acceptable. Pyxis Solitary (yak). 12:29, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I expanded the article to improve its notability per WP:HEY. The Times of India articles source that was added is an interview with an actor not the filmmaker and is a passing mention. DareshMohan (talk) 10:43, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I am not satisfied with frameline source that has been misrepresented as critical review. That leaves only one review by Now Toronto. If anyone can find one more critical review from reliable sources, please let me know. Interviews are not secondary independent source. RangersRus (talk) 15:29, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When it comes to Asian films, it's not easy to find reviews for them outside of Asia-related newspapers, websites, magazines; unless a film is groundbreaking, or becomes a critics darling, or gets word-of-mouth recommendations, or wins awards. Particularly when they are independent films. That's the reality of non-West films. Kattumaram is reviewed in High on Films, Apt613, and Asian Movie Pulse. (RottenTomatoes does take some of High on Films RT1 and AMP RT2 reviews into consideration). It has been included in a handful of academic papers about Indian cinema. Pyxis Solitary (yak). 05:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for sharing the sources but these are still not credible or reliable. Apt613 is a blog. Even High on films, anyone can write for them and per RT is not a Tomatometer-approved publication. Reviews from this publication only count toward the Tomatometer when written by the following Tomatometer-approved critic(s): Debopriyaa Dutta, Pramit Chatterjee, Shikhar Verma, Vassilis Kroustallis. The review is by neither of these approved writers. Asian Movie Pulse is also not a Tomatometer-approved publication. Reviews from this publication only count toward the Tomatometer when written by the following Tomatometer-approved critic(s): Amarsanaa Battulga, Grace Han, Joshua Polanski, Nathan Sartain, Olivia Popp, Panos Kotzathanasis, Renee Ng, Teresa Vena. The review here too is not from one of these approved critics. RangersRus (talk) 12:37, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Reviews from this publication only count toward the Tomatometer when written by the following Tomatometer-approved critic(s)". I wrote, "RottenTomatoes does take some of...." (Imo, if RT accepts any film review from the afore-mentioned sources, then other reviews from those same sources should be acceptable.) As for a source being a blog: WP:BLOGS states – "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." I suggest you seek input on WT:MOSFILM about film sources, because there are many blogs (such as Film School Rejects, /Film, and Cinapse) that are used as reliable film-related sources in Wikipedia and what is considered a reliable film source is ever evolving. You may find this article from Film Comment a useful learning tool: The Top Film Criticism Sites: An Annotated Blog Roll (yes, it was published many years ago, but many of the blogs listed are still in operation). Pyxis Solitary (yak). 10:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 18:04, 5 April 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]

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 14:11, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:16, 11 April 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]