Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

Shortcuts

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|India|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to India. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

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

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

Purge page cache

watch

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

See also: Points to remember when debating in India related deletion discussions.
Note: AnomieBOT removes and archives closed debates from this page a few times a day, so there is no need to manually remove such pages.
Deletion sorting by state or union territory:
- Andhra Pradesh
- Arunachal Pradesh
- Assam
- Bihar
- Chhattisgarh
- Delhi
- Goa
- Gujarat
- Haryana
- Himachal Pradesh
- Jammu and Kashmir
- Jharkhand
- Karnataka
- Kerala
- Ladakh
- Madhya Pradesh
- Maharashtra
- Manipur
- Meghalaya
- Mizoram
- Nagaland
- Odisha
- Punjab
- Rajasthan
- Sikkim
- Tamil Nadu
- Telangana
- Tripura
- Uttarakhand
- Uttar Pradesh
- West Bengal

India

Gujarat Itihas Parishad

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

Doesn't meet notability as an organization. - The9Man ^Talk 07:56, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:11, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:11, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:11, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dabaru

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

I can't find news or media sources that would help this subject pass WP:GNG and WP:NFILM. Even after its release, there are no reliable critical reviews available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DivitNation (talk • contribs) 09:03, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Discussion page was created without the {{afd2}} template and not transcluded to a daily log. Fixed now--I have no opinion of my own at this time. @DivitNation: You have made multiple AfD nominations, and while they have been made in good faith, every one of them was malformed and/or did not follow proper procedure. Please read WP:AFDHOWTO, and please fully follow the instructions there for any future nominations so as not to make extra work for your fellow editors. Thank you. --Finngall ^talk 19:43, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Shellwood (talk) 20:13, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: https://www.ottplay.com/review/dabaru-review-surya-sekhar-gangulys-biopic-deserves-more-than-just-melodrama/28693966d3847 ; https://www.telegraphindia.com/entertainment/dabaru-more-about-a-mother-son-bond-than-grandmaster-surya-sekhar-gangulys-chess-talent/cid/2019530 =2 bylined reviews in English at least. - Eva Ux 21:09, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games and West Bengal. - Eva Ux 21:12, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The bylined reviews above and another bylined review here are enough for GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 07:23, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Viraj Khanna

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:CREATIVE. The references provided are mostly WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Agent 007 (talk) 19:27, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Visual arts, and India. Agent 007 (talk) 19:27, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and West Bengal. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:19, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Delta Study

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

Can't find coverage of this school in reliable secondary sources, fails WP:NSCHOOL and WP:GNG ApexParagon (talk) 16:40, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:38, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:45, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Basically unsourced stub. Lorstaking (talk) 08:40, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alok Dixit

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

Promotional article about a journalist and activist, who received some passing mentions or trivial coverage in the news articles associated with his ex-wife Laxmi Agarwal and his associate Aseem Trivedi. He also received some mentions in the news articles related to " 'Anonymous' hackers to protest Indian Internet laws", but the subject fails WP:SIGCOV & WP:GNG.

The article was created in 2012 by a Wp:SPA. Zuck28 (talk) 15:28, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Social science, Internet, India, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh. Zuck28 (talk) 15:28, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neeraj Baid

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. The article lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Most of the references are limited to routine announcements, such as inclusion in a Forbes 30 Under 30 list, brief mentions in startup-focused outlets, and company-affiliated sources. There is no in-depth, independent coverage that demonstrates sustained notability or broader public interest. The article reads more like a promotional profile than an encyclopedic biography, and does not meet the threshold for a standalone article

Thilsebatti (talk) 14:57, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Canada. Thilsebatti (talk) 14:57, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:52, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Cited sources barely mention him while covering the company he cofounded. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTINHERIT applies. Gheus (talk) 02:09, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Srujana Gopal

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

I have searched for significant coverage of the subject in reliable, independent sources but could not find any that meet the requirements of WP:NBIO. The existing article relies primarily on primary sources, routine institutional mentions, or brief announcements, none of which provide the in-depth, secondary coverage necessary to establish encyclopedic notability. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:22, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:22, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Andhra Pradesh and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dev Varyani

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

None of the sources provide significant, independent, or in-depth coverage. Most are promotional or based on brand partnerships, interviews, or event appearances. Fails GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:18, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Education, Ghana, and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:18, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dev Varyani may meet notability. FrontPageAfrica provides independent coverage highlighting his impact in West Africa: [Source]. I tried trimming his page for neutrality and supported with verifiable references. Thank you. 1OutstandingSeason (talk) 13:02, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One source alone is not sufficient to establish notability under WP:GNG. Wikipedia requires multiple independent, reliable sources with significant coverage. Without additional such references, the subject still fails to meet the threshold for a standalone biography. Thilsebatti (talk) 13:30, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't find any sourcing about this person. Sourcing used is PROMO or vaguely about this person. We don't have enough for GNG Oaktree b (talk) 13:47, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Oaktree b. Cited sources are unreliable. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 02:14, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alkem Laboratories

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

It lacks Significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. citations are self published, WP:ROUTINE and not meeting any standards of WP:RS. LKBT (talk) 17:09, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Medicine, India, and Maharashtra. LKBT (talk) 17:09, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fazal Ali Khan

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

This individual article fails in WP:GNG, and WP:SIGCOV. There is only passing mention in news articles from a single news organization. The other two sources also have only WP:TRIVIALMENTION that he was the son of Chaudhri Sultan Ali that doesn't confirm the notability even when his father's article doesn't even exist. Delete this article per WP:FAILN. Sybercracker (talk) 15:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Asia, Pakistan, India, and Punjab. Sybercracker (talk) 15:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom, the nominator has a best reason. It seems article have many issues with sources. Dolphish (talk) 00:18, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
what issues? Elaborate Anpanman11 (talk) 14:13, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find any reliable sources, so it's fails WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 05:57, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
british era contemporary gazetteers, reports, as well as modern news outlets and official Pakistan government sites in entionedhim many times. Aren't they reliable enough.? Anpanman11 (talk) 14:15, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Phagwara

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

The article appears to be violating WP:OR. The battle itself lacks significant coverage. There is nothing to show if this is a notable subject. THEZDRX _{(User) |}_(Contact) 03:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:53, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sikhism, and Punjab. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Not a significant conflict. Lorstaking (talk) 08:41, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aheria

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

Qualified for deletion policy, unsourced, one line article. Dolphish (talk) 05:38, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, Asia, India, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh. Dolphish (talk) 05:38, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Annu Gaidhu

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

An exact copy of declined draft at AFC. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. The subject appears to have limited, mostly routine coverage in local or community outlets. Coverage primarily focuses on her role as Miss India–Canada 2014 or yoga-related event mentions, but lacks significant independent, in-depth biographical coverage in reliable secondary sources. Much of the media used is either trivial, brief, or not about her in a substantial way. Notability is not inherited from participation in a beauty pageant or teaching yoga unless supported by significant coverage. Thilsebatti (talk) 04:19, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Fashion, India, and Canada. Thilsebatti (talk) 04:19, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom, the nominator have a best reason. Taabii (talk) 10:14, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There are only three sources about the beauty pageant that come up in my search, which doesn't appear to be a notable pageant either. Otherwise appears to be a routine yoga teacher, with a non-notable career. Oaktree b (talk) 13:25, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	Text generated by a large language model (LLM) or similar tool has been collapsed per relevant Wikipedia guidelines. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Thank you for reviewing the draft. I understand your concerns regarding notability under WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. However, I’d like to respectfully clarify and expand on a few key points: 1. Cultural and Niche Notability Should Not Be Dismissed This draft falls under multiple Wikipedia WikiProjects, including: WikiProject Yoga WikiProject Canada WikiProject Women WikiProject Biography – Arts and Entertainment Annu Gaidhu’s work exists at the intersection of trauma-informed yoga, diasporic South Asian identity, and youth empowerment. These are areas often underrepresented on Wikipedia. As per WP:NOTABILITY and WP:NOTELOCAL, niche figures can still be notable if they receive significant coverage within the reliable sources of that niche. 2. Reliable Coverage Exists—Some in Pre-Digital Formats A substantial portion of the subject’s press coverage occurred during the early- to mid-2010s, especially in ethnic media, academic bulletins, and print-only publications. This includes: Imprints Magazine, featuring the Healing Hearts Project as a model of intercultural student philanthropy Desi Today and Desi News, which ran multi-page features on her yoga and advocacy work The Toronto Star, which included her voice in coverage of cultural pageant ethics Some of these sources may not have digital archives readily accessible through common online searches, but they are print-published, ISSN-registered, editorially controlled, and have documented independent coverage of the subject. These meet the threshold for WP:RS. 3. Notability Is Not Solely Inherited from Pageantry While Miss India–Canada is a starting point, the article focuses on: Founding a trauma-informed yoga initiative (covered independently) Writing and narrating a documentary film screened at multiple festivals (with awards) Receiving recognition from institutions like the High Commission of India, Rotary International, and university programs in social justice education Each of these claims is verifiable and supported by independent publications or institutional citations. The subject's continued presence and impact in youth wellness spaces—especially within marginalized communities—speaks to her broader cultural and educational contribution. 4. Encouraging Inclusion and Notability for Non-Mainstream Figures In line with Wikipedia’s equity and inclusion principles, it’s important not to apply an overly narrow interpretation of notability that disadvantages women, people of color, and community-based leaders who may not have been profiled in major outlets but are well-recognized within their fields. ---- I am happy to provide: Scanned copies or verifiable citations of offline print sources Expanded references showing award legitimacy and organizational affiliations A breakdown of which sources meet WP:SIGCOV I appreciate your time and am committed to ensuring the article complies with Wikipedia’s standards while honoring the diversity of notable contributors in yoga, healing, and intercultural education. Yogshakti1991 (talk) 20:18, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply] The Toronto Star isn't significant coverage. The high commission, Rotary and the University aren't sources that show notability. The film appeared at non-notable film festivals. You're left with the two Desi news outlets and the student journalism project, which aren't enough to show notability. None of your sources show notability. The pageant appears non-notable due to a lack of coverage, so winning it doesn't add to notability. Being a yoga teacher isn't notable and rather routine. The film might be notable, but we have no sourcing for it either, no critical reviews nor wide distribution. There's nothing notable about this person for our purposes. Oaktree b (talk) 20:20, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If your draft failed at AfC, it won't pass here either. There are also copyright violations associated with the photo about the film, another red flag. Oaktree b (talk) 20:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't seem to pass SCHOLAR either, there are exactly three hits in Gscholar, two are primary and one is a citation as mentioned. Still nothing to show notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 20:30, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Krithika Nelson

AfDs for this article:

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

Bringing this here for a full discussion as the last AfD was lightly attended. I still do not see sufficient sourcing to indicate creative nor business notability. Star Mississippi 13:44, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Women, India, and Tamil Nadu. Star Mississippi 13:44, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: We still only have passing mentions.. Again, Same as last time in October, nothing has changed since then. The award might be notable, but we'd need much more sourcing than what's given now. I can't find anything extra that wasn't there in October. as stated in the last AfDs. Oaktree b (talk) 14:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing, I believe that if there is coverage, it is in Tamil. Svartner (talk) 21:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that Wikipedia generally prefers articles/coverage in English to ascertain a person's notability. While there are only a few English news sources, the subject of the article is a fairly popular name among the regional audience. Beyond the existing references, she has been mentioned in and linked back from several other articles, which I urge to be considered valid enough to establish her notability. Aishu.m (talk) 05:21, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Links from other articles have no bearing on notability, nor does English language sourcing if you can show the depth of sourcing in Tamil articles. The issue is that mentions and popularity are not significant enough for notability Star Mississippi 13:05, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Surjasikha Das

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

The subject fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Taabii (talk) 11:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, and India. Taabii (talk) 11:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify, new article which could be improved rather than deleted, as highlighted by Fade258 SDGB1217 (talk) 10:09, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. After conducting a thorough BEFORE search, I was able to find reliable, secondary and independent references to the subject which includes trivial information or routine coverage that doesn't meet the threshold criteria for general notability guidelines or demonstrate significant coverage. The article was created on 21st July 2025, which appears to be a fairly new. She has had some supporting roles in notable movie and TV shows i.e Maa (2025 film) and Bade Achhe Lagte Hain 3 respectively. So, as per alternatives to deletion draftify will be applied here for further improvement. Fade258 (talk) 14:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Assam-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shyam Kishor Awasthi Ji

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

Non-notable Indian politician who clearly fails WP:GNG, and WP:NPOL. Taabii (talk) 09:02, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Taabii (talk) 09:02, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – He may have received some local coverage as a party coordinator, but fails in WP:NPOL. Svartner (talk) 21:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
would such comments not be at risk of discrimination by his political peers? 31.205.145.5 (talk) 23:12, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He contested a single election and finished third, it is an objective criterion. "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability". Svartner (talk) 23:21, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saurabh Sethi

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

The subject lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Most references are press releases, affiliated sites, or trivial mentions. No evidence of sustained notability. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Medicine, Delhi, California, Massachusetts, Michigan, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Most of the references are non-reliable (please read WP:RS), and I don't think the subject passes WP:GNG in any way. Baqi:) (talk) 09:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per nom. Taabii (talk) 11:34, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The majority of the sourcing is made up of variations on "Harvard doctor reveals..." in unreliable and marginally reliable sources. I couldn't find anything better that could indicate a GNG pass. He seems to have a few decently cited papers, but is clearly not primarily known for being a scholar and is well short of meeting any of the NPROF criteria. MCE89 (talk) 14:36, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jaya Thakur

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

The subject is a model and beauty pageant titleholder (Miss Himalaya 2023), but the coverage available is mostly limited to routine announcements, brandwire/sponsored content, and press release-style pieces. There is a lack of significant, in-depth coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources as required by WP:GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 02:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Fashion, and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 02:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Poor to unreliable sources, not a single source has a credible byline. All the contests/titles/awards mentioned are non-notable. Hence failing GNG. Zuck28 (talk) 08:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Cannnot find any source which can be called a WP:RS. The subject clearly fails notability guidelines. Taabii (talk) 11:33, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kohinoor Mukherjee

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

All the significant coverage is from a press release campaign in the second half of May 2023. The remaining two sources have passing mentions of the subject. Acoustical (talk) 02:01, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and India. Acoustical (talk) 02:01, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:NCOMPOSER. He has worked on several films, but has never had a notable work in the educational field or won any major awards. Svartner (talk) 21:50, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quantum Nation

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

Fails WP:NBOOK.

Sources 4, 5, and 6 do not mention the book at all (source 5 was published in 2022, before this book was published).
Source 10 is a WP:PRIMARY database entry of the book.
Sources 1, 3, 7, and 8 are non-notable WP:SPS promotional websites: "authorsofindia.com", "eeherald.com", "analyticsinsight.net", "quantumcomputingreport.com".
Source 9 appears to have WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues with the lack of byline and includes this strange disclaimer at the end: This is a syndicated feed. The article is not edited by the FPJ editorial team.
Source 2 is available here and is just a WP:TRIVIAL mention of the book. Astaire (talk) 20:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Physics, Computing, and India. Astaire (talk) 20:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pointing this out Sources 4, 5, 6. To clarify:

Source 4 is correctly cited for its coverage of the National Quantum Mission, which is a central theme in the book. It provides context and relevance for the material discussed, especially the government’s role and ecosystem development.

Source 5, although published in 2022, is referenced in the wikipedia article in the context of India’s historical trajectory in the software industry. The book draws on earlier industry developments and analyses, making retrospective reference appropriate.

Source 6 is included to support the section connecting quantum ideas with ancient Indian texts. While the book itself extends the interpretation, the source provides relevant cultural and philosophical context that enriches this discussion.

That said, I welcome collaborative efforts to further refine the citations, as Quantum Nation presents original perspectives that have been positively received by readers and experts in India’s quantum and deep tech community.

Regarding Source 10.

Source 10 (WorldCat) is used here to verify the existence and library holdings of the book. While it's classified as a primary source in Wikipedia’s guidelines, the fact that the book is held by multiple independent university libraries does suggest curatorial interest and reinforces the book’s credibility.

Regarding Sources 1, 3, 7 and 8

I agree regarding 1 and 3 am removing them. But analyticsinsight.net and quantumcomputingreport.com—are widely cited in the quantum technology and tech journalism space and may be considered reliable.

The book has been recommended as a “Must Read” in the Quantum Vibes Q4 2024 issue which is an official publication hosted at quantumindia.net, a government-supported platform for India’s National Quantum Mission. This adds institutional credibility and helps establish the book's relevance in the quantum ecosystem. I am adding this new source in the wikipedia article for this book.

I agree that overall the article could benefit from further cleanup and improved sourcing, and I’m happy to work on that. However, I would not recommend deletion at this stage. The book Quantum Nation: India’s Leap into the Future has received significant attention and positive reception across quantum conferences and forums in India. Notably, it was listed as a “Must Read” in Quantum Vibes Q4 2024 — the official publication associated with India’s National Quantum Mission from the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing. This helps establish both relevance and notability. PN2024 (talk) 09:49, 23 July 2025 (UTC) — PN2024 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The source you added (page 9 of [1]) does not qualify under WP:BKCRIT, which specifically excludes "media re-prints of press releases" and "flap copy". This source does not add any commentary or opinion on the book; it is simply a verbatim reproduction of the publisher's marketing copy: Imagine a universe where every star in the sky and every molecule in your coffee cup forms part of an immense quantum computer... [2] This cannot be used to establish the book's notability. Astaire (talk) 15:00, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree with the characterization that the Quantum Vibes mention should be dismissed from inclusion under WP:BKCRIT. While it includes a summary of the book, it is not a promotional reprint or publisher flap copy. Quantum Vibes is a quarterly publication by the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing, a neutral, third-party organization with strong ties to the national quantum community. The book was included in a “Must Read” recommendation list in its Q4 2024 issue (page 9), which clearly reflects recognition from within the domain.

This inclusion demonstrates that Quantum Nation is part of serious discourse in India's quantum innovation landscape. Dismissing this as mere marketing (which the Quantum Vibes mention is clearly not) ignores its relevance as an indicator of community engagement and professional endorsement. PN2024 (talk) 16:09, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, after we began this discussion, I reviewed several issues of Quantum Vibes and did not come across a single instance of advertising or marketing. The content appears entirely editorial and carefully curated by subject matter experts, which adds to its credibility as an independent and authoritative source. PN2024 (talk) 16:22, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It does not "include a summary of the book". It is a word-for-word reproduction of the publisher's marketing copy for the book, with no added commentary. Astaire (talk) 17:56, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. It is laughably far from being an actual book review. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 02:35, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I understand the concern about the use of promotional text, I would like to state my observation that Quantum Vibes is not a promotional newsletter. I believe it’s important to view this in context:

1. The source is the official newsletter of C-DAC Centre for Development of Advanced Computing — India’s premier R&D institution for IT, electronics, and computing. This isn’t a random publication or a commercial flyer.

2. The content of the newsletter is editorial and expert-driven. I looked up several names on the editorial board listed at the end, and they are indeed established experts in computing. The rest of the newsletter, too, is written by top experts and maintains a serious, professional tone and there’s no evidence of promotional fluff or random reproductions of press releases.

3. Most importantly, the tone and framing of the mention clearly position the book as a “must-read” — not merely echoing marketing material but endorsing it through the authority of the institution and its contributors.

4. Sometimes a brief mention even if it includes book blurbs can function as a clear recommendation or signal of notability, particularly when it comes from a body like C-DAC. Not every review must be a multi-paragraph critical analysis to be meaningful in a notability discussion.

5. I believe this reference is best understood in spirit, not just word count and in that spirit, it qualifies as an endorsement from a leading national institution in the field. PN2024 (talk) 05:11, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I agree fully with the analysis of the article's current sourcing, and I didn't find any additional sources that could contribute towards WP:NBOOK after doing my own searches. MCE89 (talk) 14:51, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, not to mention challenges due to likely WP:COI. Vegantics (talk) 21:06, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom source analysis. Svartner (talk) 21:46, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the above source analysis. Surayeproject3 (talk) 17:07, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion - I strongly disagree with the proposal to delete this article. The subject, Quantum Nation: India’s Leap into the Future, has received growing recognition and relevance in India’s quantum technology landscape. I have added a new source from a national quantum mission led official publication.

I request everyone to reconsider. PN2024 (talk) 09:56, 23 July 2025 (UTC) — PN2024 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete To show that a book is notable, we need reliable reviews, not vacuous, shameless advertisements. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 02:35, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The WorldCat entry mentioned above is entertaining. It quotes three five-star reviews, all of which are obvious right-click-thesaurus rewritings of the same text. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 02:39, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point of the WorldCat entry may have been misunderstood. The intention was not to highlight the reviews quoted there, but rather to indicate that multiple top universities — including Washington University in St. Louis, University of Texas at Arlington, and Colorado School of Mines — have independently chosen to include the book in their library collections.

This curatorial selection by academic institutions suggests credibility and notability. As we know, university libraries don’t casually add books — their acquisitions are typically based on faculty recommendations, relevance to academic programs, and librarian curation, all within limited budgets.

To avoid further confusion, I’ll remove the WorldCat link and instead provide direct links to the individual university catalog entries. That should make the sourcing clearer. Apologies for any misunderstanding caused. PN2024 (talk) 05:18, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some top universities holding quantum nation. Adding entries after a first level search. There may be more.

University College of London, UK: https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/44UCL_INST/155jbua/alma9932523239004761

Washington University, St Louis, USA: https://wash-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1kqpcd6/WUSTL_SIERRA210437456

Colorado School of Mines, USA: https://mines.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01COLSCHL_INST/1jb8klt/alma998209597202341

North Carolina State University, USA: https://catalog.lib.ncsu.edu/catalog/NCSU6009964

University of Texas at Arlington, USA: https://uta.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/openurl?institution=01UTAR_INST&rfr_id=info:sid%2Fsummon&rft_dat=ie%3D21260459520004911,language%3DEN&svc_dat=CTO&u.ignore_date_coverage=true&vid=01UTAR_INST:Services&Force_direct=false

Indian Institute of Management, Raipur, India: https://iimraipur-opac.kohacloud.in/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=22065

IIIT Delhi, India: https://library.iiitd.edu.in/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=189551&query_desc=kw%2Cwrdl%3A%20quantum%20nation

IIIT Vadodara, India: http://library.iiitvadodara.ac.in/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=1400 PN2024 (talk) 06:10, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've now added direct catalog links from several top universities and institutes across the US, UK, and India that have independently acquired Quantum Nation, further supporting its notability through curatorial selection. PN2024 (talk) 06:13, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sarjin Kumar

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

There is little coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources under the name “Sarjin Kumar.” Most info comes from social media or entertainment sites, which doesn’t sufficiently establish encyclopedic significance. The BO77! (talk) 19:55, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Visual arts, Entertainment, India, and Tamil Nadu. The BO77! (talk) 19:55, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @The BO77! I think the page i have created needs more citation and can be improved. But placing a deletion tag maybe avoided and you can ask for improvement. Thanks! Gooi-007 (talk) 19:58, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! @Gooi-007 but don’t need to remove the deletion tag yourself an admin will close the discussion as “Withdrawn” and remove the tag once processed.The BO77! (talk) 20:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn – I now believe this article may be improved. Thanks. The BO77! (talk) 20:02, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your consideration @The BO77! Gooi-007 (talk) 20:12, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note to Closer. Though nominator has withdrawn the AFD nomination, I would prefer this AFD review to continue. My reason behind this is, the page was created by an editor, 15 days old, who moved the draft to mainspace without letting it go through AFC review. I reviewed the page after looking at this AFD and found the subject to fail WP:GNG. The sources are poor to unreliable. Source Analysis.
- Source 1 is unreliable and very likely you will invite malware by clicking on this page.
- Source 2 by TOI has passing mention.
- Source 3 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES.
- Source 4 is unreliable personal site/blog.
- Source 5 is about YouTuber dressed as a woman.
- Source 6 is just passing mention.
- Source 7 and 8 are also passing mention.
- Source 9 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES. RangersRus (talk) 23:38, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per my analysis above. RangersRus (talk) 23:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: My source analysis given below

No.	Source	Type	Independent	Reliable	Significant Coverage	Notes
1	Filmibeat – "Who is Sarjin Kumar?"	Entertainment listing	✅ Yes	❌ No	❌ No	Low-quality site per WP:ALMGS; routine coverage; no depth.
2	ABP Nadu (Tamil)	Regional news	✅ Yes	❌ No (Brandwire-tier)	❌ No	Trivial mention of entry to a reality show; no biographical depth.
3	Mirchi9 (hypothetical)	Entertainment blog	✅ Yes	❌ No	❌ No	Unverified; generally unreliable for establishing notability.
4	Social media mentions (Instagram, YouTube)	Self-published	❌ No	❌ No	❌ No	Fails WP:RS and WP:SELFPUB; unusable for notability.
5	TV appearance on Cooku with Comali 6	Primary source (TV show)	❌ No	❌ No	❌ No	Being part of a TV show cast is not sufficient for notability without secondary coverage.

All sources fail to provide the in-depth, independent, and reliable coverage required under WP:GNG.Thilsebatti (talk) 03:14, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Clearly fails WP:NACTOR even WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 09:37, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I concur with other !voters here, that although the AFD nom was withdrawn by the nominator, there is no indication that this person meets notability criteria per WP:GNG, nor are a notable photographer, thus failing to meet WP:NARTIST, nor is there evidence that there is the kind of significant coverage in fully independent reliable sources covering his acting career to meet WP:NACTOR. Deleting it at this time would save community time, because it would just be renominated if the withdrawal was put into effect. Netherzone (talk) 15:16, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Darshan University

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

Non notable University. Fails wp:NSCHOOL & Wp:NORG. Zuck28 (talk) 10:19, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Schools, India, and Gujarat. Zuck28 (talk) 10:19, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I couldn't find any RS coverage of this university. The current sourcing is limited to a government publication listing all private universities, and an appearance in a list of emerging business schools. I found nothing to suggest an WP:NORG pass. MCE89 (talk) 13:11, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. does not pass WP:NORG. --hroest 13:27, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Nucle Saga I

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

Fails WP:NBOOK. Sources 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8 are WP:PRIMARY sources - the book itself, the author's website, the author's YouTube channel, etc. Sources 1, 2, 6, and 9 are promotional articles - either an interview of the author or an article about the book launch. These are excluded under WP:BKCRIT #1: publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book. Astaire (talk) 05:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Literature, Saudi Arabia, and India. Astaire (talk) 05:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Satyaki Dwapar Ka Ajey Yodha

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

Fails WP:NBOOK. All sources in the article have WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues - overly promotional language, lack of bylines, text that is poor quality or AI-generated, etc. Astaire (talk) 05:28, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Mythology, and India. Astaire (talk) 05:28, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

→===V. Senthil Kumar===

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

Most coverage is company-focused, not about him individually. There are no reliable, independent biographical profiles with in-depth coverage. The article relies on press releases, event coverage, and primary sources affiliated with Qube Cinema. While his AMPAS membership is a notable recognition, it is not supported by independent, in-depth coverage in reliable secondary sources. Thilsebatti (talk) 04:12, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 04:12, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:38, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree with the nominator. Most of the articles are about the company rather than the person, and even those are not from reliable sources. Therefore, this fails WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 10:23, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Passes both WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Multiple independent, reliable sources offer significant biographical coverage, not mere routine company mentions:
- D. Govardan, “They changed the way we watch movies”, The Times of India, 21 Nov 2022 – in‑depth career profile tracing Kumar’s innovations from Media Artists (1986) through Qube Wire (2018).
- M. Suganth, “Chennai‑based movie tech guru Senthil Kumar gets Academy invite”, The Times of India, 1 Jul 2020 – coverage of his AMPAS induction.
- Sowmya Rajendran, “Chennai Qube Cinemas’ Senthil Kumar speaks on being invited to be Academy member”, The News Minute, 1 Jul 2020 – independent interview.
- Shobha Warrier, “Indian entrepreneurs have 100 times more opportunities today”, Rediff, 25 Nov 2013 – detailed entrepreneurial retrospective.
- “Surprised, thrilled: Qube Cinemas co‑founder on Oscars Academy invitation”, The Week, 4 Jul 2020 – third‑party profile following AMPAS honour.
- Special Achievement Award (IMAX Big Cine Expo, 2018)* – reported by Medianews4u, 29 Aug 2018. (https://www.medianews4u.com/big-cine-expo-successfully-concludes-its-third-edition/)
- Distinguished Alumni Award (NIT Tiruchirappalli, 2023)* – covered by The Times of India, 13 Dec 2023. (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/trichy/nit-t-distinguished-alumni-awards-and-young-achiever-awards/articleshow/105948111.cms)
- These articles and award reports amply satisfy the “significant coverage” requirement of WP:GNG, while the AMPAS membership, IMAX Special Achievement Award, and NIT‑T Distinguished Alumni Award are all selective honours that meet WP-NBIO §1/§3/§8. Any COI or tone issues can be fixed through normal editing; they are not grounds for deletion. — SanjayMadhavan (talk) 07:56, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Disagree. The sources cited are either brief event-based mentions, interviews (primary), or trade/press-release style writeups. There is no in-depth, independent, reliably sourced biographical coverage of Senthil Kumar as required by WP:GNG. The AMPAS membership, IMAX Special Achievement Award, and NIT-T Distinguished Alumni Award are indeed selective recognitions. However, WP:NBIO requires that such awards be covered in-depth by reliable independent sources, which is lacking here. At present, the subject fails both WP:GNG and WP:NBIO due to absence of sustained, independent biographical coverage in reliable secondary sources. Most sources are limited to brief announcements or primary interviews. Thilsebatti (talk) 18:50, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The source analysis is as follows.

No.	Source	Publication	Type	Reliable?	Independent?	Substantial Coverage?	Notes
1	[‘Indian films are known for stories’: V Senthil Kumar](https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/tamil/indian-films-are-known-for-stories-v-senthil-kumar-9162105/)	Indian Express	Interview	✅🟩	❌	❌	Primary source. Reliable but not independent. Very limited depth.
2	[Qube's Senthil Kumar joins Oscars Academy](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/tamil/movies/news/qubes-senthil-kumar-joins-oscars-academy/articleshow/101615481.cms)	Times of India	News article	✅🟩	✅	❌	Reliable and independent, but only event-based coverage.
3	[SMPTE Fellow recognition](https://www.indiantelevision.com/technology/software/v-senthil-kumar-elected-as-smpte-fellow-240123)	Indiantelevision.com	Trade article	✅🟨	✅	❌	Trade-style source. Coverage is announcement-based.
4	[Exchange4Media – SMPTE fellow](https://www.exchange4media.com/media-tv-news/v-senthil-kumar-of-qube-cinema-elected-as-smpte-fellow-129698.html)	Exchange4Media	Trade article	✅🟨	✅	❌	Trade media. Lacks biographical depth.
5	[India Today – Oscars invite](https://www.indiatoday.in/movies/regional-cinema/story/oscars-2023-sid-sriram-monika-shergill-senthil-kumar-are-now-part-of-oscars-academy-2403602-2023-07-10)	India Today	News article	✅🟩	✅	❌	Reliable and independent. But only brief mention among others.
6	[Behindwoods – Oscar invite](https://www.behindwoods.com/tamil-movies-cinema-news-16/oscars-2023-invitation-senthil-kumar-qube-cinema.html)	Behindwoods	Entertainment site	❌🟥	❌	❌	Fails WP:RS. Promotional tone. Not usable.
7	[BusinessWorld – SMPTE fellow](https://www.businessworld.in/article/V-Senthil-Kumar-Elected-As-SMPTE-Fellow/24-01-2024-503226/)	BusinessWorld	Business press	✅🟨	✅	❌	Possibly based on press release. Lacks depth.
8	YourStory (previously cited)	YourStory	Startup site	❌🟥	❌	❌	Fails RS criteria. Avoided due to blacklisting.

Clearly fails GNG and NPROFESSOR. Thilsebatti (talk) 18:47, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thilsebatti: Comment – All of the URLs in the eight-row table appear to be either mistyped or unrelated to V. Senthil Kumar and were not cited in the article, so the reliability scoring is not verifiable:

Indian Express link (`…9162105`) URL returns 404.
TOI link (`…101615481`) URL returns 404.
Indiantelevision URL returns 404.
India Today URL returns 404.
Exchange4Media URL redirects to an unrelated Viacom18 media-rights article.
Behindwoods URL returns 404.
Business World URL redirects to home page with a page Invalid input pop-up.
YourStory is blacklist-tagged on en-wiki and was not cited in the article.

Per WP:V and WP:BURDEN, the onus is on the editor adding a source to provide an accurate, working citation. Until correct links are supplied, the table (and the conclusions drawn from it) should not be used to assess GNG/NBIO compliance. Madan80 (talk) 02:23, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — Meets both WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Over 12 years (2013 – 2025) the subject receives sustained, in-depth coverage in reliable, independent sources about him personally, not just his company:
- ‘’D. Govardan, “They changed the way we watch movies”, The Times of India, 21 Nov 2022’’ – 1,800-word career profile from 1986 to Qube Wire (2018).
- ‘’Pranati A. S., “Accessibility is not a feature, it’s a social imperative”, Deccan Herald, 29 Nov 2024’’ – IFFI master-class piece on accessibility by Kumar. https://www.deccanherald.com/india/accessibility-is-not-a-feature-its-a-social-imperative-says-senthil-kumar-at-iffi-3297767)
- ‘’Shobha Warrier, “Indian entrepreneurs have 100 times more opportunities today”, Rediff, 25 Nov 2013’’ – retrospective interview following Real Image/Qube milestones.
- ’’N. Vinoth Kumar, “Oscars: How Senthil Kumar’s Qube Cinema changed the Indian film industry”, The Federal, 16 Jul 2020’’ – 2-page analysis tied to his AMPAS invite. (https://thefederal.com/the-eighth-column/oscars-how-senthil-kumars-qube-cinema-changed-the-indian-film-industry)
- ‘’M. Suganth, “Chennai-based movie-tech guru Senthil Kumar gets Academy invite”, TOI, 1 Jul 2020’’ – independent report, not press release.
- Selective honours that satisfy NBIO §8
  - ‘’Member-at-Large, Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences (2020)’’ – one of only three Indians invited that year (TOI, 1 Jul 2020).
  - ‘’IMAX Big Cine Expo – Special Achievement Award (2018)’’ – covered by Medianews4u, 29 Aug 2018; official award video on YouTube (Network208 channel, 30 Aug 2018) includes testimonials from multiple notable persons including Rajkumar Hirani, Vidhu Vinod Chopra and Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra praising ‘Kumar’s’ personal contributions. (https://www.bigcineawards.com/awards18.php) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ3_oH-XRNE)
  - ‘’Distinguished Alumni Award, NIT Tiruchirappalli (2023)’’ – reported in TOI city edition, 13 Dec 2023. (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/trichy/nit-t-distinguished-alumni-awards-and-young-achiever-awards/articleshow/105948111.cms)
With multiple substantial features plus three nationally-reported, selective honours, Kumar clearly passes GNG and NBIO (§1, §3, §8). Any remaining COI polishing can be handled by normal editing; deletion is unwarranted. — Madan80 (talk) 03:05, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manish Kumar Gond

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

The sources cited are mostly local news articles, press releases, or routine coverage of art exhibitions, and do not provide significant independent coverage. There is no evidence of in-depth analysis or recognition in reliable, independent secondary sources. Thilsebatti (talk) 04:01, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Biology, and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 04:01, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:38, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Recourses mentioned in the article are covered in national media including DainikBhaskar and other one is on the official site of President of india. I do believe that the said resources provides a proof of recognition. Alwaysakashart (talk) 09:22, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The subject fails WP:NBIO, WP:NPROF and WP:GNG. Cannot find WP:RS. Taabii (talk) 11:36, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The sources are of low quality fluff, and not the kind we usually would find for a notable artist, such as reviews, chapters in art history books or academic journals. Nor are there works held in notable museum collections. What the sourcing consists of is his faculty page as an assistant professor, three press releases that seem to all be based off the same release, his page on his commercial gallery's website, press release "ID #2009492" about meeting a famous person, and a puff piece with the byline "Art Gold Life" in a "magazine" that publishes user-submitted content, which seems to be native advertising. No indication that this artist meet WP:GNG nor WP:NARTIST. Netherzone (talk) 15:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shastra (2025 film)

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

Appears to fail WP:NFILM. Only 1 review (Times of India), which has a "no consenus" for reliabliblity on WP:RSP DonaldD23 talk to me 19:52, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. DonaldD23 talk to me 19:52, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is reliable for non-controversial content such as film reviews as per the discussion, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:49, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If counted, it is still 1 review short of WP:NFILM. DonaldD23 talk to me 02:32, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gaurav Sharma (author)

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

A promotional article for a non notable author, by using aggressive PR techniques, unverified claims, paid for advertising articles, with a high chances of COI & UPE involved. All the books by the subject seems to be non notable but still the editor created articles for all of them. The subject clearly fails wp:NAUTHOR.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, India, Bihar, Delhi, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 15:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I was going to wait to nominate this page until the AFDs for the subject's books have concluded - but none of the books appear notable to me, and if they are not notable then there is no case for WP:NAUTHOR.

Cf. the book discussions:

Astaire (talk) 16:41, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Astaire (talk) 16:42, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This cluster of articles appears to be promotional and based on only dubious sources. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:36, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rishabh Kashyap

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

Non notable singer, fails wp:NMUSIC, No SIGCOV, just routine coverage. Created by a sock. Zuck28 (talk) 14:01, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, India, and Bihar. Zuck28 (talk) 14:01, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: While the article does say he is an Indian actor and singer, the article (such as it is) is more about his acting career and does not bring up his singing any further, so NACTOR would be more relevant here. I have no opinion or comment beyond that, though. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:55, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:55, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deanne Panday

AfDs for this article:

WP:RUNOFTHEMILL fitness trainer with no significant achievements and no WP:SIGCOV. Sources are mostly, passing mentions, routine coverage, interviews and gossips around her notable relatives. The article was created by a blocked SPA. Zuck28 (talk) 12:33, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Health and fitness, Nepal, India, Delhi, Maharashtra, and Scotland. Zuck28 (talk) 12:33, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep: As I stated in the previous nomination, the subject clearly meets the requirements of WP:GNG by receiving significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. Notable examples include a detailed articles in DNA (300+ words), an article by Time of India (350+ words), Business Standard, NDTV, Hindustan Times, and MidDay, among others. These are independent, reliable secondary sources that provide substantial detail about her career, publications, and public influence, not mere name-drops or trivial mentions. As WP:GNG states: If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability. In this case, multiple substantial articles from mainstream publications combine to satisfy the notability criteria. Therefore, the subject meets both WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. GSS ^💬 14:51, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can’t see your comment on the previous nomination. Did you participate in the last AFD?

This DNA article you mentioned is non-bylined promotional article to advertise her personal training service.

The Times of India article is also clearly advertorial piece with a disclaimer "Disclaimer: This article was produced on behalf of Life Health Foods by Times Internet’s Spotlight team."

Business standard article is a book review without the name of the reviewer, clear promotion.

NDTV article is more focused on the Book and Salman Khan, not the subject of the article.

The Hindustan Times article is about the opinions of multiple people, and she got trivial coverage, fails Wp:SIGCOV.

midday article is just a photo gallery, without any critical assessment of her career.

This proves the article fails wp:GNG and Wp:SIGCOV both. Zuck28 (talk) 15:09, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, I did participate in the previous AfD, but regardless, notability is determined based on policy and the quality of sources, not continuity of participants. Regarding the sources: while it's fair to assess for promotional tone or disclaimers, dismissing all coverage as non-notable misapplies WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. The DNA India article, which is over 300 words, discusses her career, influence, and clientele. The absence of an author byline does not disqualify its reliability or editorial status, as many editorial articles are unsigned unless marked as sponsored. As for the Business Standard article, it was written by journalist Asmita Aggarwal (credited by name), so the claim that it lacks one is factually incorrect. The article engages directly with her book and fitness philosophy, not simply as a product plug but in a substantive profile format. The NDTV piece, while it includes Salman Khan, is centered around Deanne Panday’s book launch and includes her quotes and ideas this qualifies as non-trivial coverage. Similarly, the Hindustan Times and Mid-Day articles offer independent mentions. Per WP:GNG, notability is assessed holistically. If depth in any one source is limited, multiple independent sources may be considered collectively. In addition to the previously mentioned sources, here are more in-depth, independent articles that further support her notability and provide substantial coverage suitable for expanding the article; Economic Times, India Today, HT, Indian Express, HT. In my view, these sources align with the requirements under WP:GNG and provide further opportunity to expand the article. GSS ^💬 16:12, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would add that the Salman Khan reference is not a counter argument but perhaps the opposite, as it would ultimately demonstrate her importance as celebrities' fitness/well-being coach (as claimed), and thus the importance of keeping the article. Metamentalist (talk) 13:14, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Metamentalist, Almost every celebrity is associated with some fitness/ wellness coach, according to your understanding does that make all of those coaches notable? Just because they’re associated with celebrities? See Wp:NOTINHERITED. Zuck28 (talk) 13:32, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She has been associated with more than one, and has produced work in different media (books and DVDs) on the matter, she's not the "average" wellness coach. Metamentalist (talk) 16:52, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete:Agree with the nomination here. Notability is not established with significant professional sources. It is a gathering of mentions, routine coverage at best. Coldupnorth (talk) 18:04, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please clarify why you consider these sources to lack significant coverage or to be routine mentions? The articles I provided above including the one from The Economic Times are detailed, full-length features that focus specifically on Deanne Panday’s work as a fitness author. They include original quotes, biographical context, and discussion of her professional influence, which seems to go beyond routine coverage.

I've also found additional in-depth coverage such as:

Times of India: An editorial piece focused on her fitness career and early start as a wellness coach, not gossip or routine reporting.
India.com: Another article with biographical depth highlighting her career journey, wellness philosophy, and professional associations.
ABP Live: While partly visual, it still includes contextual details about her work as a fitness trainer and author.
News18 Hindi: Offers background information in the context of her family, but also presents her personal achievements and fitness career.
News24 Hindi: Mentions her appearance in a music video, but within a broader frame of her public presence.

These sources provide in-depth coverage of her career and public contributions and not just passing mentions or celebrity gossip. Several include original reporting, and contextual depth. There appears to be enough to merit a broader look through WP:BEFORE if needed. Thank you, GSS ^💬 05:09, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

India. Com article is primary source, written by the subject herself.

MSN article is a syndicated feed from a TOI interview, again a primary source.

News18: A photogallery with a tag of "agency", indicating a PR supply.

And News24Hindi article link is not working. Zuck28 (talk) 05:20, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about that?

The India.com article was written by their journalist Kritika Vaid, not by the subject herself, so it's not a self-published or primary source.

The MSN article, I've already replaced it with the original from TOI. Also, it's not a direct interview it uses a few quotes, making it a secondary report rather than a primary one.

As for News18, the article was authored by journalist Versha, not labeled as PR. News18India is a legitimate media outlet under the News18 group, not a pr agency.

Lastly, here is the link to News24Hindi, edited by their journalist Nancy Tomar. You can't just simply dismiss every source just because you nominated the article for deletion. Each source should be evaluated on its own merits, not based on the outcome you’re hoping for. GSS ^💬 05:53, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Majhi Prarthana

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

Already in draft space, circumventing article submission process BOVINEBOY2008 03:16, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:38, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify - it's actually sourced now, as I tagged, but the format needs some work. Bearian (talk) 12:31, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zeek (music producer)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. The article doesn’t show that the subject has received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Most of the references are self-published or affiliated platforms like CanvasRebel, SoundBetter, and social media, which don’t establish notability. The tone also reads more like a personal bio or promotional piece rather than an encyclopedic article. Thilsebatti (talk) 05:57, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 05:57, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources are poor and unreliable. Fails NMUSIC & GNG. Written like a resume. Possible COI. Zuck28 (talk) 07:49, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:34, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vaishali Nigam Sinha

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

The subject don't have significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Most sources cited are either affiliated with the subject (e.g., UNDP, WEF), passing mentions, or promotional profiles (such as listicles and interviews). Thilsebatti (talk) 05:45, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 05:45, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Promotional article created by wp:SPA. Sources are not significant to pass the notability criteria. Zuck28 (talk) 07:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In addition to the concerns pointed out above regarding single purpose editing and promotional material, I think it's worthy to mention that the company is notable but, it seems, the subject is not as well covered and lacks widespread coverage in independent, secondary sources. Auretechtalk, please also note that as an SPA you are required to disclose any external relationships with article subjects if you have one per our Conflict of interest policy. GuardianH 09:25, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Roller Coaster Ride!

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

Fails WP:NBOOK. Author and publisher are both non-notable. Source 1 is debatable whether it qualifies under NBOOK - a single paragraph with no commentary or opinion provided. Source 2 is a WP:UGC blog. Source 3 is an interview of the author, which is disqualified under WP:NBOOK: publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book. A WP:BEFORE search found a couple of trivial mentions [3] [4] and another interview of the author [5], but nothing that counts toward notability. Astaire (talk) 03:08, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and India. Astaire (talk) 03:08, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per the nomination, this is a promotional piece for a non-notable book. The sources are unreliable and insufficient. Zuck28 (talk) 07:58, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article discuss more about the author Saumil Shrivastava than the topic itself failing WP:NBOOK. Seems to be a promotional tact.--FreaksIn 18:14, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hind-Pak Bordernama

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

Fails WP:NBOOK. Author and publisher are both non-notable. The two sources in the article [6] [7] are both largely interviews of the author, which are excluded under WP:NBOOK: publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book. The only other source I found during WP:BEFORE is this brief article [8] which just says that the book was "widely acclaimed". Astaire (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Pakistan, and India. Astaire (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wolf's Lair (book)

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

Borderline failure of WP:NBOOK. The author and publisher are both non-notable. There are three sources in the article and I could not find more during WP:BEFORE. The second source [9] seems fine as an independent review. The first source [10] has a conflict of interest: the reviewer discloses at the end that he was a guest of honour at the launch event of Wolf’s Lair. The third source [11] is mainly a short interview of the author, which is excluded under WP:NBOOK: publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book. Astaire (talk) 00:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Military, Politics, and India. Astaire (talk) 00:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dreams & Chaos (book)

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

Author and publisher are both non-notable. Can't find any independent reviews of this book. The only sources available are those like [12] and [13] announcing the book's launch, which are excluded under WP:NBOOK: publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book. Appears to have inspired a web series which may also be non-notable. Astaire (talk) 00:21, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, India, and Nagaland. Astaire (talk) 00:21, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

God of the Sullied

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

Non notable book, promotional article. Sources are press releases, paid for spam articles. See also:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diary of a Whimsical Lover
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief and
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Long Live the Sullied.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Indian Story of an Author.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gone Are the Days (novel). Zuck28 (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Fictional elements, Language, Literature, India, Delhi, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Sources 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 are not WP:SIGCOV of the book itself, but some other topic (the author's publishing house, the author's other books, etc.). Sources 4, 9, 10, 12, and 13 (same source as 4) are overly positive and promotional reviews with WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues. Source 2 is a broken link that I can't access through the Internet Archive. I can't find any proof of Source 11's existence. That leaves Source 8, which requires payment to view and wouldn't satisfy WP:NBOOK by itself anyway. Astaire (talk) 23:37, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Promotional and fails WP:NBOOK. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:26, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gone Are the Days (novel)

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

Non notable book. Fails GNG and NBOOK. Sources are poor to unreliable, primary PR links by Wp:NEWSORGINDIA.

The Indian Story of an Author

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

Non notable book, fails Wp:GNG, wp:NBOOK and wp:SIGCOV. Possible COI & UPE. UNI is paid for press release, New Indian Express is an interview, and rest two are promotional articles by wp:NEWSORGINDIA.

Long Live the Sullied

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

Non notable book, promotion/ advertisement. Fails GNG, NBOOK. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diary of a Whimsical Lover. Zuck28 (talk) 20:46, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Literature, India, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 20:46, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NBOOK with WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues.

Source 2 has no reviewer byline, which WP:NEWSORGINDIA highlights as a cause for concern: use of generic bylines not identifying an individual reporter or reviewer. This is especially true for people, companies and entities of borderline notability, which is the case here.
Source 3 is from the same website and also about the book's prequel, not the book itself.
Source 4 is the same website that I discarded over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief for being overly promotional.

I haven't examined the first source in detail, but even with only one good source, it would fail WP:NBOOK anyway. Astaire (talk) 22:44, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Promotional and fails WP:NBOOK. Over this series of nominations, the Deccan Chronicle source comes closest to being an independent RS, but it's a very basic review, and one isn't enough. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:33, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Diary of a Whimsical Lover

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

Non notable book. Fails Wp:NBOOK, Wp:GNG and Wp:SIGCOV. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief. Zuck28 (talk) 20:41, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Fictional elements, Language, Literature, India, Delhi, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 20:41, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NBOOK with WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues.

The first reference is a broken link, and I can't find it on the Internet Archive.
The second and fourth references have the same issues that I raised over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief - lack of a reviewer byline and overly promotional content, respectively.
The third reference is a brief three-sentence plot summary without expressing any opinion on the book. Doesn't qualify for criterion #1 of WP:BKCRIT.

Astaire (talk) 22:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Promotional and fails WP:NBOOK. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond Countless Grief

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

Non notable book. Fails Wp:NBOOK, Wp:GNG and Wp:SIGCOV. No sources except two poorly written press releases/non-bylined promotional pieces and an unreliable dead link. Possibly a case of COI/UPE. User: Bond111 and their alternative account user:Dial911 were heavily involved in the creation and editing of the articles related to the author Gaurav Sharma (author) and his non-notable books. Zuck28 (talk) 20:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Fictional elements, Language, Literature, India, Delhi, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 20:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Can't find anything online apart from the sources mentioned above. Looking through databases I have access to shows no results whatsoever. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:44, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NBOOK with serious WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues. I can't find evidence that the first source even exists. The second source [14] byline is "News Desk Team". It is highly unorthodox for a book review not to mention the reviewer's name, and it also goes against their own editorial standards [15]: Articles must mention all individuals who worked on the piece, including authors, contributors, and editors. The third source [16] is overly promotional (there are headers for "Sponsored Guest Post" and "Brand Partnership") and does not look like a reputable news source (the website no longer even exists). Astaire (talk) 21:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Promotional and fails WP:NBOOK. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Milind Sovani

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

Vanity page, which is mostly filled with promotional content and links to social media sites, and coverage from reliable sources is clearly lacking. Article would need to be rewritten entirely if kept. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Food and drink, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Most of the cited sources are interview-based and in my WP:BEFORE I found similar sources. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 02:42, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meena Menon

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

Can't find reliable secondary sources that are talking about this Indian voice actor. BEFORE searches turned up unreliable user-generated sources, many of which just seem to copy this Wikipedia article. This article used to have a single reference: a dead link to Sugar Mediaz's profile on her (obviously a primary source since she works there) and now has absolutely no references. Doesn't seem to satisfy GNG ApexParagon (talk) 16:08, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No sources and fails notability. Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:14, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:19, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:31, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As pe nomination. Garbage for Wikipedia. Zuck28 (talk) 22:11, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, agree with Agnieszka653. SDGB1217 (talk) 22:33, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete source are not finable and therefore fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV Iljhgtn (talk) 20:07, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sati Tulasi (1959 film)

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

It appears to lack significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that demonstrate its notability as required by WP:GNG and WP:NFILM. WP:BEFORE has not revealed adequate coverage to establish notability. CivicInk (talk) 19:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Music, Television, Theatre, and India. CivicInk (talk) 19:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added references and more content -bssasidhar- >Talk Page 19:57, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is no plot, no info about the release; just a big fat nonsense table listing songs and poems. It would be better to delete the article, and if the film is notable, someone else can start from scratch someday, armed with WP:Reliable sources, and write something that makes sense. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:07, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Plot and release date have been added. -bssasidhar- >Talk Page 11:35, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, you did not add a source for the release date. There should be sections for the development and production of the film, its promotion and release -- was it played at Festivals? Did it have theatrical release, direct-to-video, or what? You need to add sources for all of this. What did the critical reviews say? What was the film's budget and total gross revenue? If there are no independent reviews and sources, then this film is not notable. This is still just a rambling stub. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:10, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Directing debut of a prominent film director (see https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/hyderabad/2012/Jan/12/veteran-film-director-passes-away-329441.html). Added a source to the page about the director for the theatrical release (Encyclopedia of Indian Cinema p. 642; also see p. 549.) It is hard to believe that someone could ask if a 1959 film could have had a direct-to-video release but maybe that was a joke. The cast is also fairly notable. Please see WP:NFIC which states "The film features significant involvement (i.e., one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of their career. An article on the film should be created only if there is enough information on it that it would clutter up the biography page of that person if it was mentioned there." Seems to be the case. But if the cast and plot can be redirected and merged into the article about the director, feel free. Anyway, deletion does not seem necessary.- Eva Ux 22:54, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:26, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm seeing some search results for an alternate spelling Sathi Tulasi, but still no sources showing notability. No (inserted - good sources) ~~sources~~ for the Telugu Wikipedia article [17] either. And there appear to be two films with this name. One is dated 1936. Also poorly sourced over there. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 00:57, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

T.K. Khaleel

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

Non notable enterpreneur. Sources are routine and mostly PR. Fails GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:33, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Tamil Nadu. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:33, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Mulladam (talk) 08:58, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have revised the article to make sure the sources cited are independent secondary sources. The subject is a famous baker from the GCC with multiple, named industry awards and international recognition. He was the focus of a cover story in the independent trade magazine Gulf Gourmet. The purchase of subject's company by Almarai, a major publicly-traded corporation was a significant economic event in the sector and was reported by independent financial news outlets like Gulf Business. I believe the article now satisfies the requirements of WP:GNG. Thank you! Ashik Jose (talk) 13:21, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist, please review after recent changes by the article creator.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:46, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Vadodara bomb hoaxes

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

Does not pass WP:NEVENT. There are a lot of school bomb hoaxes, the coverage here is not extensive. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:45, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and India. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:45, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Article meets WP:NEVENT because This is not a single, trivial event but a series of hoax bomb threats across multiple institutions (schools, airport, power plant, collector’s office) in Vadodara in 2025. It had serious public impact and law enforcement response (evacuations, cybercrime involvement, and arrests).

The event has received non-trivial, significant coverage in independent and reliable sources such as The Times of India, The Print, and Indian Express. Coverage is not routine or passing; it includes detailed reporting, investigation follow-up, and national relevance.

As per WP:NEVENT, this qualifies for inclusion. Deletion is not appropriate when a topic meets both WP:GNG and WP:NEVENT. --Warm Regards, Abhimanyu7 talk 09:45, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bombs threats, even series of them, happen. Bombs threats often get coverage for a few days and get the schools evacuated; this does not make this case more severe than average. There is not national relevance or follow up. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:16, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NEVENT. No international coverage, no significant impact, no lasting effects (so far) and it's too soon to say whether there's continued coverage. Astaire (talk) 02:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:16, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete As usual, the rush to include local news ignores the impossibility of assessing long term impact, but chances are that it'll just blow over. Mangoe (talk) 11:52, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable news story. Article is high in content but says a whole lot of nothing. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 02:00, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rao Mitrasen

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

The article is largely based on non-academic, regionally published & self-published books with limited verifiability. Multiple sources do not meet the standards WP:HISTRS for historical claims. The article shows signs of WP:FANPOV and contains unbalanced, unsourced glorification and conflicting timelines. Chronos.Zx (talk) 16:24, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Military, India, Haryana, and Rajasthan. Chronos.Zx (talk) 16:24, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: Even a simple Google search, specifically in the Google Books section, shows that the subject is mentioned in at least five different books. This clearly indicates that there is likely more information available about the subject in offline sources (WP:OFFLINE) as well, although I’m not entirely sure about the full extent of it. Baqi:) (talk) 10:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - since it's not a BLP, WP:BEFORE applies. I combined several references into two sources, and cut out a personal opinion. There is obviously some notability based on what's online and already there. This is not so terrible that it can't be fixed with a few more edits. The article history looks like an editor started to try to fix it and gave up. Alternatively, can this be merged into another article? Bearian (talk) 10:43, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dynasties of Ahirs

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

This article is a WP:COATRACK of loosely connected dynasties, many of which lack reliable scholarly consensus linking them to the Ahir community. The references often fail WP:RS & some are misused to support fringe or WP:UNDUE historical claims...also fails WP:V, and WP:SYNTH. Chronos.Zx (talk) 15:32, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Nepal, India, Bihar, Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal. Chronos.Zx (talk) 15:32, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Evidence of synthesis includes the lists of states far apart from each other and from different epochs. Bearian (talk) 15:32, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 18:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rudraneil Sengupta

AfDs for this article:

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

Lack of significant coverage in secondary and reliable sources. The subject fails Wp:NAUTHOR and wp:GNG. Creator is currently blocked as a sock puppet. Zuck28 (talk) 12:37, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, News media, India, and Tamil Nadu. Zuck28 (talk) 12:37, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:26, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – This source looks reliable [18], and he published at least two books (I can't say exactly how wide they were). Svartner (talk) 21:43, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indus University (Gujarat)

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. There is no independent coverage. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:38, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, India, and Gujarat. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:38, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hold. While the current article may lack sufficient sourcing, this university is a notable institution in Gujarat.

The article appears outdated and underdeveloped. I intend to improve the content by adding reliable, independent sources that demonstrate notability per WP:NSCHOOL and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Requesting time to address these concerns with appropriate references. Njoy deep (talk) 12:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Made changes, have a look now Njoy deep (talk) 07:23, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Do the sources recently added to the article establish notability?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 15:08, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article does not demonstrate significant coverage in reliable, independent sources as required by WP:GNG. Most references are either affiliated with the university, promotional in nature, or lack depth. Without substantial independent sourcing, the subject does not appear to meet notability requirements for educational institutions WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, and inclusion risks violating WP:NOTDIRECTORY.

Putting the article back in Draft might be helpful to improve the page.--FreaksIn 15:19, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indrashil University

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. There is no independent coverage. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, India, and Gujarat. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Page does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organization. Poor sources on the page with no significant coverage. Fails WP:NSCHOOL. RangersRus (talk) 19:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A tie up between Cadila Pharmaceuticals and Indrashil University.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:10, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

^[1] ^[2] ^[3]

^[4]

References

^ "Cadila Pharmaceuticals and Indrashil University Launch Tailor-Made Executive Diploma to Bridge the Campus-to-Corporate Gap in Pharma, ETEducation". ETEducation.com. 1 October 2024. Retrieved 19 July 2025.
^ De, Rajneesh (16 April 2025). "'Our Vision is to Become an AI & Emerging Tech Innovation Hub that Offers Interdisciplinary Research, Industry-Driven Projects, and Skill-Based Certifications': Prof (Dr) Dharmesh Shah, Provost, Indrashil University". APAC Digital News Network. Retrieved 19 July 2025.
^ "Cadila Pharmaceuticals and Indian Red Cross Society to train 50,000 students in CPR and First Aid". The CSR Universe. 30 January 2024. Retrieved 19 July 2025.
^ "Indrashil University holds its maiden convocation". Suger Mint. 10 February 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2025.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are sources shown above that have also been added to the article; a review of them would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 15:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ramakrishnan Sivaswamy Iyer

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

Bunch of non-notable awards in unreliable, unbylined sources. Has a lot of coverage but none of it is in reliable sources. The Gulfnews article is the only good source among them, but it isn't enough for WP:GNG. ATDR - Transworld Group (shipping and logistics company) Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:06, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, United Arab Emirates, India, and Kerala. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:06, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Nominator has said that the awards are non-notable, my comment about the awards are as follows
1. I don't know why and how the award given by President of India recommended by Ministry of External affiars, India, is non-notable?
2. Forbes has listed this personality in Top Indian Business Leaders In The Middle East 2021, how Forbes is non-notable?
3. The Maritime Standard Awards are the prestigious awards of Middle east and Indian Subcontinent. Questioning this award also doesn't make sense.ABDB1 (talk) 05:27, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article does seem promotional, but I tend to agree with the above comment that it is a bit ridiculous to call those awards non-notable. – Ike Lek (talk) 06:14, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep:

Pravasi Bharatiya Samman is a very notable award and there's good media coverage about him receiving the award. Also as a chairman of a notable company since 1989, the subject is likely to pass the notability guidelines. Zuck28 (talk) 06:41, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:01, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Holding my nose here because the article's promotional and some of the media sources are pretty woeful BUT recipient of a notable, bluelinked award Pravasi Bharatiya Samman gets 'im past GNG. And AfD is not cleanup, no? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Indian strikes on Myanmar

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

This article is made up on current news articles.. Violates WP:NOTNEWS and clearly will leave no long lasting historical significance.. Can be also merged within United Liberation Front of Asom. WinKyaw (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Myanmar and India. WinKyaw (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
note: article has not been updated for the past 7 days basically making the article totally made up of WP:ROUTINE news. Claims are very denied and unconfirmed with no enduring notability basically not meeting the wp:article criteria. WinKyaw (talk) 06:31, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Military. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:12, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:NOTNEWS is misinterpreted here as it discourages day to day news and transient events and topics without ensuring relevance however the attack was a significant one as it was conducted in the territory of Myanmar.With the reference of historical significance, articles like the 2015 Indian counter-insurgency operation in Myanmar exists which initially started off as news based but later evolved to standalone historical events. A change in the article name might be a topic of discussion if needed

Legion of Liberty (talk) 20:30, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm the article name should be changed cause this isn’t Myanmar vs India.. But the fact that India didn't claim they attacked ULFA-I camps makes it difficult to keep the naming and harms neutrality. 2015 Indian counter-insurgency operation in Myanmar was a confirmed operation by India. Where as this one was clearly denied.

But clearly I see this topic won't last longer than 3 days, irrelevent as days passes unless it leads to something big soon which is unlikely. WinKyaw (talk) 05:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are other examples of such cross border attacks like 2024 Iranian missile strikes in Pakistan , where Pakistan wasn't the target rather the baloch militants inside it so that might be a more accurate type of name that can be applied to this article and for the second point made , Operation Outside the Box this attack which was made by Isarel on Syria was denied by Israel until 2018 , so wikipedia doesn't require offical confirmation for the coverage of an well covered incident by sources of different medias , as WP:V and WP:NPV.

An cross border strike by a nuclear armed state which is again seen after the last major strikes 10 years ago definitely hails notability and even if it vanishes from the headlines , in future the people who revisit the article for info and also as per WP:NEVENT if a event recieves non-insufficient coverage in multiple reliable sources , then it proves the notability as well. I'm ready to negotiate the article name. Legion of Liberty (talk) 10:57, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Legion of Liberty's argument. AHI-3000 (talk) 02:11, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. Coverage is recent and largely routine reporting of alleged military activity with no enduring notability & I strongly believe it lacks long-term significance and appears to be WP:TOOSOON. Chronos.Zx (talk) 14:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If that is the case then there are several drone strike articles available on wiki despite having a lower notability than this event. Such an example is - 2025 Waziristan drone strike.An covert cross border strike is notable enough if it is covered by several medias as far less notable drone strike articles are available on wiki. Legion of Liberty (talk) 03:42, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Draftify: agree that this is WP:TOOSOON to determine. Most other events like this are just additions to existing articles like Spillover of the Myanmar civil war (2021-present), or United Liberation Front of Assam. It's possible it becomes significant but as far as I can tell all the sources are covering the same routine details EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 22:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not necessary that different stories get mentioned in different medias however what is necessary is the coverage of the incident WP:SIGCOV.The incident is not a regular crime or Insurgency incident instead it involves a "not regular" cross border strike. India does not strike locations in Myanmar daily.The incident is not a spill over of the Myanmar civil war either and WP:SUMMARYSTYLE notes that a notable subtopic can be a article. This event has greater notability than 2025 Waziristan drone strike where such incidents are far more common than the ones here however they still survive on the notability of Wikipedia so I think this article can do the same with higher notability than them. Legion of Liberty (talk) 03:21, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well on 14 May 2025 Indian troops entered Myanmar and killed some of Myanmar's soldiers according to local sources. Of course, India denies it and there isn't enough coverage to justify the specifics (only primary sources and geoanalysis of the video being on the Myanmar side of the border). [19] In addition, Myanmar does regularly strike Thailand without much coverage, so in my opinion this is a similar case to the other spillovers. In the case of the 14 May attack, that was also not necessarily because of the civil war either but it's also covered in Spillover.

This specific strike is well covered for sigcov but it doesn't necessarily have enough to beat WP:NOTNEWS in my opinion. If more analysis rather than WP:ROUTINE coverage comes out this would obviously be notable enough. It's just toosoon. 21:30, 15 July 2025 (UTC) EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 21:30, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. It is also too early to create an article on this subject. Raymond3023 (talk) 06:02, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nirmal Mahato

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

Non-notable politician, fails Wp:NPOL. No wp:SIGCOV is found except few news articles revolving around his murder case. His murder case could pass the notability as an event but not this biography. Zuck28 (talk) 17:09, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Politics, India, Assam, Bihar, and Jharkhand. Zuck28 (talk) 17:09, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:30, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bunty Singh

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

All the sources are about his death. SIGCOV: Not Found, Fails NACTOR, GNG and ANYBIO. Zuck28 (talk) 16:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Dance, India, Bihar, Jharkhand, and West Bengal. Zuck28 (talk) 16:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the coverage appears to be occasioned by his death, assessing the career of someone prominent who has died, not about his death, as would be the case if someone was murdered or died in an unusual way. This kind of editorial obituary coverage actually establishes notability under GNG. Jahaza (talk) 18:50, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Career includes non-notable projects, that too without proper citations. Fails Wp:NACTOR. Zuck28 (talk) 18:57, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:30, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RCTV Sangbad

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

Indian TV news channels are a dime a dozen. There is no claim to notability in this article, and it's frighteningly close to an A7 speedy. Sending to AfD over PROD in case Bengali-language editors have better luck, but judging by the low pageviews (59 in 30 days), there might not be a lot here. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 05:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, India, and West Bengal. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 05:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:44, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I have been unable to find any sources to demonstrate notability. Cutting out Wikipedia, Facebook, Instagram, Youtube and their own website from google search basically only leaves Softonic app downloads. Weirdguyz (talk) 09:25, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marudhu Pandiyan

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

Fails WP:NFILMMAKER and WP:GNG. The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd references in the article are reviews about the film. LKBT (talk) 12:34, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Entertainment, India, and Tamil Nadu. LKBT (talk) 12:34, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The subject appears to meet notability guidelines for film directors. Reliable sources from The Hindu, Film Companion, and others exist and have been added. Will continue to improve article with inline citations. Surendrankaliyaperumal (talk) 19:06, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Moved !vote from Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Marudhu Pandiyan. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 19:58, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NFILMMAKER even WP:GNG, it seems like the titles of the references have been altered to mislead other editors. Baqi:) (talk) 13:27, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This AfD will hinge on this sentence from NFILMMAKER The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. (emphasis added). It is certain that he directed 2 movies (Chennai Ungalai Anbudan Varaverkirathu and Asuravadham) which is playing a major role in creating them, but are they significant or well-known works. I am leaning towards no and thus delete but I think this is what the focus of the discussion should be. Moritoriko (talk) 07:11, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – * Keep – Marudhu Pandiyan directed multiple films that have received independent coverage in national publications including *The Hindu*, *Film Companion*, *News18 Tamil*, and *BBC Tamil*. His film *Asuravadham* was discussed extensively in critical circles and review columns. This coverage satisfies WP:GNG, and directing more than one theatrically released feature supports WP:NFILMMAKER. The article has since been improved with inline citations to reflect these sources. User:Surendrankaliyaperumal (talk) 18:42, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:03, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nucleus Mall, Ranchi

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

Not at all notable. The media articles are about other brands that have opened their outlets in the mall. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 11:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 11:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:54, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Jharkhand-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:11, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Lalpur, Ranchi#Shopping: The first source, [20], has unclear reliability and independence, it seems to be a self-published blog. Otherwise, the available coverage I could find consists of random events and store openings that happened to take place in the mall, a mention in [21], and coverage of alleged illegal construction which cannot establish notability per WP:ILLCON. Could also be redirected to Ranchi#Economy. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:01, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Lalpur, Ranchi#Shopping per above.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No need to redirect I've already added four reliable citations based on the incidents Satipem (talk) 08:26, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't want this article about a shopping mall to be redirected or deleted. The mall already clearly has 4 citations reliable.
Satipem (talk) 08:36, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for input on sources recently added to the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 13:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The added sources are mostly about store openings and injuries that happened inside the mall, not the mall itself. The last source [22] only contains a trivial mention of the mall. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 19:24, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sotbella

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

Absolutely unnotable brand and fails to meet NCORP. The sources are undisclosed paid placements and puff pieces. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 11:16, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 11:16, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:53, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:11, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The subject meet WP:ORG and WP:GNG. There is some coverage in independent, non-trivial sources such as:
- Vogue India** – coverage of Sotbella's capsule collection with commentary on Indian heritage ([Vogue India](https://www.vogue.in/promotion/sotbellas-new-capsule-collection-celebrates-indian-heritage)).
- Business Today** – mentions the brand in the context of emerging Indian fashion businesses. Along with this the existing sources in the article helps to meet notability.While the article currently requires cleanup for tone and improved referencing, deletion may be premature given the potential for development. — 111.92.121.62 (talk) 13:42, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 13:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. The brand was "launched" in August 2023 and these sources are simply regurgitating the same information provided by the founder about herself and the new brand. Fails ORGIND and NCORP. Perhaps the founder is notable enough for an article? HighKing⁺⁺ 21:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2022 Uttarakhand bus accident

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability, and high-casualty bus crashes are common. Fails WP:EVENT. Per WP:NOPAGE, this is better covered at List of traffic collisions (2000–present) or Dhumakot. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:08, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, India, and Uttarakhand. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:08, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As per WP:NEVENT. Events are also very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources. Accident which caused 32 deaths is not something that always happen. It was also discussed throughout the nation well as indicated by the sources.Thilsebatti (talk) 03:38, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT – Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the event itself. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage of the event itself with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. The only mention of the crash that I could find post-June 2022 was a brief mention in October 2022 in a list of road accident in Uttarakhand from Al Jazeera. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this event lacks per the above. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:17, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - first I'd say how sorry I am to read about this. Second, I would disagree that 32+ dead in a bus accident would ever be not notable. Third, I would prefer to see the (unfortunately numerous) mass casualty events in Uttarakhand merged into a single page to avoid this kind of nom. I can't !vote for a merge as there isn't a page to merge them to as far as I can tell. Anyway, until that page exists, I'd say that the half-dozen mass casualty events are all notable. JMWt (talk) 20:20, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
JMWt, something being tragic or causing fatalities, as I already said in the nomination statement, is not a factor that's considered in an event's notability. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:29, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are entitled to your opinion. Mine is that an event which tragically kills more than 30 people should always be considered notable on en.wiki. JMWt (talk) 20:35, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all the coverage is from October 2022. It needs lasting coverage to meet WP:EVENT. The number of people dead is not a criterion for notability. LibStar (talk) 09:42, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
with respect, all the coverage in English might be from that date. You're telling me that there are not likely to be other references about a massive casualty event of this size? Nobody had an obituary, no government or official reports, no recriminations, complaints etc? Highly unlikely. JMWt (talk) 10:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide these sources then. LibStar (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't speak local languages. I'm talking about the likelihood that they exist. I've found a news reference talking about an official accident report, so clearly it has significance beyond news. JMWt (talk) 11:06, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a letter from the federal Supreme Court talking about an extensive report (pdf) 1 JMWt (talk) 11:32, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gujarat Gramin Bank

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

Not a notable entity. Lack of independent in depth media coverage. WikiMentor01 (talk) 10:06, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and India. WikiMentor01 (talk) 10:06, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Gujarat. Shellwood (talk) 10:23, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This Indian bank is supported by substantial coverage and meets the criteria of WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Sooterout (talk) 17:37, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep Per Sooterout. Also, it is only two months old. Coverage is poised to get bigger. Servite et contribuere (talk) 19:48, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge to Bank of Baroda Wikipedia is not a place for self-promotion. The article is written like a press release and there is no significant coverage.Chanel Dsouza (talk) 11:24, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article needs to be rewritten and additional citations are required. No doubt the article is in terrible condition, but Wp:BEFORE indicates, it's notable enough to have a stand-alone article. Zuck28 (talk) 09:58, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 10:45, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: meets WP:BASIC. I agree that it reads like a press release, but that issue can easily be corrected.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:18, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akshay Bardapurkar

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

Sources are mostly PR and self-published. Not worthy of an article. Fails GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 07:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 07:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the Forbes India listing is a made up in one day award for an up and coming but run of the mill business person, producers and managers being especially ordinary. See also WP:NOTFB. The remaining sources are also unreliable or not independent. Bearian (talk) 15:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nominator and Bearian. 🄻 🄰 15:07, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As I can see in the article, the subject has produced 7 movies (one unreleased) and one web series, so I believe the subject clearly meets WP:PRODUCER. Best! Baqi:) (talk) 13:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The fact of having produced seven films and a web series, on its own, meets none of the criteria at WP:PRODUCER at all, let alone clearly. I'm not saying he doesn't meet those criteria, just that it takes more than what you said about him. Largoplazo (talk) 14:35, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Largoplazo, Thank you for your comments. If you look at point number three under Creative professionals, I believe the subject clearly meets WP:PRODUCER. That said, if in your view the subject still doesn't meet the criteria, could you please clarify what more would be required for them to pass WP:PRODUCER? Best! Baqi:) (talk) 10:37, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(1) You're treating point 3 as though it says, in its entirety, "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a collective body of work." (2) Why are you asking me about "if in your view the subject still doesn't meet the criteria" when I stated very clearly "I'm not saying he doesn't meet those criteria"? I wasn't commenting on whether he meets the criteria, I was pointing out that your remarks failed to show that he does. Largoplazo (talk) 11:40, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Largoplazo: Exactly, that’s what I’m trying to understand: what more would be required for the subject to clearly meet that criterion? Baqi:) (talk) 13:25, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can't help you further because I don't understand what part of the criterion you aren't understanding, if you read all of it, including all the parts that go beyond playing a role in co-creating a collective body of work. Largoplazo (talk) 14:47, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Agreeing with Baqi, the subject passes WP:NPRODUCER. If someone believes that the subject is non-notable, they need to prove how. It must very obviously pass the notability guidelines. Zuck28 (talk) 18:49, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's notability that needs to be demonstrated in cases of disagreement, not non-notability. We have criteria for assessing notability, not for assessing non-notability. If it's obvious that the person meets those criteria, you ought to be able to explain how. Largoplazo (talk) 18:57, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject is a well-known and notable figure in Marathi cinema. He is founder of Planet Marathi, with coverage in reliable sources like Hindustan Times and others in regional languages. He clearly meets WP:NPRODUCER. Monhiroe (talk) 06:36, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While Akshay Bardapurkar may be active in Marathi cinema, notability on Wikipedia is not based on fame or familiarity, but on meeting criteria like WP:GNG and WP:NPROF, WP:NPRODUCER, etc. The article currently lacks multiple, in-depth, independent, and reliably sourced profiles. Most sources are trivial mentions, event-based PR, or local coverage. Several sources are affiliated or self-published.

The mere founding of a company (Planet Marathi) does not confer notability unless independent, sustained coverage exists about him—not just his projects. As it stands, he does not meet the threshold for WP:NPRODUCER. Thilsebatti (talk) 06:33, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 15:59, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source analysis

No.	Source	Type	Independence	Reliability	Notes
1	The Week – "Akshay Bardapurkar: A versatile producer..."	Feature/Profile	✅ Independent	✅🟩 Reliable	Reliable magazine but tone is promotional and coverage is not critical.
2	Financial Express – "Plays a pivotal role in promoting..."	Passing mention	✅ Independent	✅🟩 Reliable	Reliable source, but the coverage is trivial.
3	Vogue India – "Entrepreneur redefining culture..."	Profile	✅ Independent	✅🟩 Reliable	Glossy coverage, borderline promotional.
4	Lokmat – Award announcement	⚠️ Affiliated	✅🟩 Reliable (regional)	Affiliated with Marathi cinema; routine coverage.
5	SheThePeople – Award mention	✅ Independent	⚠️🟨 Marginal	Source is borderline; not considered highly reliable.
6	IMDb	❌ Self-published	❌🟥 Unreliable	Not considered reliable per WP:USERG.
7	Hindustan Times – Celebrity quote	✅ Independent	✅🟩 Reliable	Only includes a quote, not about the subject.
8	Maharashtra Times – event coverage	⚠️ Semi-affiliated	✅🟩 Reliable	Not in-depth or significant.
9	ABP Majha – launch event	⚠️ Semi-affiliated	✅🟩 Reliable	Source is routine and local.
10	YouTube (interviews)	❌ Self-published	❌🟥 Unreliable	Fails both WP:RS and WP:INDY.
11	Twitter	❌ Self-published	❌🟥 Unreliable	Not usable as source.
12	Indian Express – Film mention	✅ Independent	✅🟩 Reliable	Not focused on Bardapurkar, passing role.
13	Mint – business event	✅ Independent	✅🟩 Reliable	Brief reference in larger business context.
14	Loksatta – press event	⚠️ Affiliated	✅🟩 Reliable	Routine event coverage.
15	Sakal Times – business feature	⚠️ Local independent	⚠️🟨 Marginal	Short, low-depth.
16	YourStory	❌ Not reliable	❌🟥 Unreliable	Blacklisted per WP:RELIABLE.
17	DNA India	✅ Independent	✅🟩 Reliable	Passing mention, not substantial.
18	Mid-Day – interview	✅ Independent	⚠️🟨 Marginal	Interview-based, borderline reliability.
19	CineBlitz	⚠️ Semi-affiliated	⚠️🟨 Marginal	Considered low-tier entertainment media.
20	India Today – cultural feature	✅ Independent	✅🟩 Reliable	One-time event highlight.
21	Business World – award list	✅ Independent	⚠️🟨 Marginal	Non-substantive inclusion in a listicle.

All the sources are routine mentions, affiliated coverage, or lack in-depth, critical treatment. The subject don't have independent coverage and fails WP:GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 06:31, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I gently remind the good reader that for BLPs, the burden of proof remains on the proponents of keeping the article. We've gotten into lots of trouble in the past with poorly sourced BLPs, including in India, where last year the government literally tried to shut down Wikipedia, and even now the wealthy and powerful want to make us bankrupt. So sadly we must self-censor. Bearian (talk) 14:37, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe we're debating only the subject's independent notability here. Has anyone here questioned the article's factuality? The Indian government's threats are over what it considers to be defamatory or uncomplimentary statements, not over the presence of articles on topics the government deems not to be notable. Largoplazo (talk) 14:55, 19 July 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 keep‎. There is a consensus of editors who are satisfied that the coverage of this article subject is sufficient and acceptable by Wikipedia standards. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:29, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PrashantAdvait Foundation

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

Fails Notability. sources are not independent. Few press releases and passing mentions. WikiMentor01 (talk) 05:30, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and India. WikiMentor01 (talk) 05:30, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Acharya Prashant unless and until independent sourcing is developed. Jahaza (talk) 13:56, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The rationale for my support of a Keep vote. I identified references [23], [24], [25], [26] and [27] that are Significant and comply with WP:GNG. Sooterout (talk) 17:30, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Source 1 is not accessible to me. Source 2 and 5 are written by authors that apart from this mostly publish un- or badly marked adverts, possibly using AI, see for example [28][29][30], as well as [31] (crypto scam)+ [32]. See also WP:RSNOI. Source 3 and 4 seem legit to me, although they have an unusual, highly praising style, especially source 4. Both are from the same news company. Iluzalsipal (talk) 21:46, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Source 1 is a passing mention in an extremely non-neutral section of a non-scientific book, definitely neither WP:REL nor WP:SIGCOV. Iluzalsipal (talk) 10:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tending towards Merge Iluzalsipal (talk) 21:46, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* Delete: Or Merge. Most of the sources are promotional PR stuff and Wp:NEWSORGINDIA. Zuck28 (talk) 10:00, 14 July 2025 (UTC) [reply]

Keep This organization is independently notable, having significant references which are from reliable sources. Evidences found to meet WP:NORG. Orbit578 (talk) 05:01, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Page meets WP:NORG requirements through several independent sources providing significant coverage. Although, a few sources mentioned earlier may give an impression of being promotional in nature, I see that the organization has received substantial coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject across different time periods and contexts and aligns with WP:GNG. Sources [33], [34], and [35] are evidence of sustained media coverage rather than single-event coverage. Notice that sources span several months and cover distinct organizational activities, indicating ongoing newsworthiness beyond promotional events. Found more coverage from a few other established outlets including [36] and [37], written by journalists with credible editorial histories. [38] demonstrates international scope and engagement with global environmental issues. Though #11, #12, and #16 are from the same news org, they were published by three different experienced journalists known for producing news articles on varied topics of public interest. These sources are at par with other high quality coverage and appear to be legitimate news reporting rather than paid placement. To sum, the sources collectively show independent editorial judgment in covering the foundation's activities across multiple domains (animal welfare, environmental awareness, education, etc). The coverage pattern suggests genuine news value rather than promotional placement, with different journalists at various outlets finding the organization's work newsworthy enough to report on independently. While some sources may be of varying quality, the totality of coverage demonstrates the foundation has achieved sufficient independent notability to warrant a standalone article per WP:NORG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anshul81 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Strong coverage in reliable sources shows clear notability of the subject. Merge suggestions come from inexperienced editors—this is a notable organisation Monhiroe (talk) 18:21, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Monhiroe, I've literally been commenting on deletion discussions since before you were born, not that my argument should necessarily be any weightier for that reason, but you can't dismiss it as that of an "inexperienced editor". Jahaza (talk) 00:01, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just wrote what I understood, please don't take it personally. Thanks. Monhiroe (talk) 06:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:03, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or Delete This page and the recent unsourced and blatantly promotional edits at Acharya Prashant display classic signs of WP:UPE. The "keep" votes above are suspicious to say the least. Yuvaank (talk) 09:28, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject is a notable non-profit organization with wide media coverage. Independent Reliable Sources confirm its significance, meeting WP:NORG. Taabii (talk) 10:13, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: My WP:BEFORE suggests that there is considerable coverage on the topic in trustworthy sources like News18, ABP News, News24, and India.com, all of which are esteemed media outlets. I am confident that this should adequately fulfill the criteria of WP:ORG. all the best! Baqi:) (talk) 05:51, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Changing my vote to Keep after reviewing the sources and thoughtful arguments by other editors. The organisation appears notable and meets WP:NORG based on independent coverage.Zuck28 (talk) 19:39, 23 July 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.

List of Khasa dynasty and Kings

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

Needless fork of Khasa Kingdom. Good content could be merged. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:46, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Nepal, and India. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:46, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.Ixudi (talk) 12:19, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

khasa kingdom is different , and the kingdom who ruled by khasa race is different Imperial khasah (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nomination is clearly in error. It's not a subtopic or fork of Khasa Kingdom. Khasa Kingdom was a specific kingdom in a specific place in a specific time period, which the list article claims would be but one entry in it, the Khasa people having established many kingdoms in various places throughout history. Per WP:AGF, I would suggest seeking a review from an expert (or working with the article creator and/or any experienced editor with access to all the sources) before moving to delete. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:05, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT, absolutely terrible article that is an embarassment to Wikipedia. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:14, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:38, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – does not seem like a fork to me, as 'K Kingdom' is a political entity, while list lists rulers of a particular ethnicity. (List is pretty confusing though, maybe oughtta follow other 'Lists of monarchs' format with dynasties/houses being just a column in a single table/list of rulers?) – Asdfjrjjj (talk) 19:06, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per WP:TNT. Dolphish (talk) 12:37, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rahul Garg

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

A promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. Just a detailed resume WP:NOTRESUME. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:17, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 11:17, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Haryana, Karnataka, Telangana, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:32, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Moglix. LibStar (talk) 06:00, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject has received in-depth coverage from multiple reliable and independent sources, including Forbes India (1, 2, 3), The Times of India (link), The Economic Times (link), and Navbharat Times (link). He was also featured in Forbes India’s “Tycoons of Tomorrow” and " Fortune's 40 Under 40” list. The subject clearly meets the notability criteria under WP:ANYBIO. Salmon dee (talk) 09:03, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Old-AgedKid (talk) 12:08, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with or redirect to Moglix. The sources seem to primarily give notability to the company rather than Garg himself. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:37, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Moglix: sources are mostly about Moglix, not the founder. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:47, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Found some more articles during my (WP:BEFORE) search, such as those from Free Press Journal, Economic Times, and Forbes that cover the founder in good detail and meet (WP:NBIO). The article does not read like a resume, and even if parts do, they can easily be cleaned up with standard editing. Cheers! Baqi:) (talk) 06:54, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FPJ article is unbylined and the Economic Times piece merely repeats what he says about himself, without any secondary analysis by the journalist. Neither of these sources count towards WP:GNG. Notability is not inherited, so the notability of the company cannot be attributed to the BLP. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:48, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FPJ feature is by a staff reporter and is a credible newspaper. The Economic times and Forbes are editorial pieces and are good sources with sufficient depth and coverage. They meet the requirements. Baqi:) (talk) 09:53, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is absolutely not how sources should be evaluated and you should know this by now. Unbylined sources are not reliable, except when used for uncontroversial claims and certainly not for establishing notability. The Economic Times is not a good source for establishing notability either, as it is a WP:PRIMARY source. Wikipedia:Interviews: The general rule is that any statements made by interviewees about themselves, their activities, or anything they are connected to is considered to have come from a primary source. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 13:37, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject appears to meet the notability criteria under WP:NBIO based on significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. The articles cited above include in-depth profiles that focus on the individual’s entrepreneurial journey and contributions, rather than solely on the associated company. Monhiroe (talk) 18:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 15:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Moglix. The subject does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. Too many of the sources are WP:NEWSORGINDIA or WP:PRIMARY (or both). Most of them are about Moglix anyway, and we must always be mindful of WP:NOTINHERITED.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:27, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Moglix. Most of the sources deal with the company rather than the subject itself, so a redirect to the parent article and a merging of the existing material would be the best case. GuardianH 13:51, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fravashi Academy

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

Unable to find any coverage that is bylined and independent apart from routine coverage of school council members, exam results and toppers. Fails GNG. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:27, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools, India, and Maharashtra. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:27, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Fravashi Academy is one of Nashik's oldest and most reputed private schools. It has been extensively covered in local and state news, demonstrated by the multiple news items in prominent and reputed news sources, like the Times of India, as you mentioned, on its results, toppers and school events. Further, in terms of notability under WP:GNG, the school has been recognised at the national level, having set a record acknowledged by a third-party institution, the India Book of Records: (https://indiabookofrecords.in/india-book-of-records-honours-the-largest-choir/). The presence of multiple independent, non-trivial sources indicates clear notability. Additionally, news about a potential buyout of the school also gained coverage from several national newspapers and news portals (https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/education/kkr-backed-eurokids-in-talks-to-buy-nasik-based-farvashi-school-for-about-rs-227-cr/articleshow/76122944.cms?from=mdr). While the article may benefit from more inline citations and formatting cleanup, deletion is wholly unwarranted. The subject clearly merits inclusion. GoldenPhoenix123 (talk) 16:41, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Results, toppers and school events are routine coverage. Even if we consider the Economic Times source, we would still need two more. India Book of Records is neither reliable nor independent and the fact that the record isn’t covered by any other reliable news media shows how unimportant it is. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 13:34, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The school and its affiliated Trust have been covered in the news: (HC restrains govt from acting against Nashik school). Further, its alumni include a chess grandmaster and former Captain for the Indian chess team, Vidit Gujrathi, as well as several prominent Bollywood actors and directors— Sayali Bhagat, Shashank Khaitan and Saiyami Kher. GoldenPhoenix123 (talk) 16:43, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The coverage of a court case involving the school’s trust is a press release. As for alumni, even if they’re notable individuals, a school's notability requires reliable, independent and substantial coverage of the school, not just a list of who studied there. We'd still need at least two more solid, independent sources with significant coverage focused on the school itself to meet the guideline. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:00, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 15:01, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As nominator said, Unable to find any coverage that is bylined and Independent apart from routine coverage of school. Fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG. I am happy to change my vote, if you provide Significant coverage. My intention is not to delete this article. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:06, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:02, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This article has only two sources, and is pretty much completely (!) unsourced and chock full with original research. There would be a good case to restart and TNT in its current state. Concur with Bakhtar40 in that there are practically no sources available and no significant coverage outside the school's own primary web materials. GuardianH 13:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Subhrakant Panda

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

A promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. Just a detailed resume WP:NOTRESUME. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:05, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Odisha. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:05, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject is definitely Notable. There is extensive coverage of the topic in trustworthy sources (WP:RS) like Business Line, CNBC TV, and The Economic Times that establishes firmly that the topic qualifies under WP:GNG. One of the arguments of the nominator is that the article is written like a resume. I would like to propose that if there are any flaws in the tone or organization of the article, then indeed they may be made better. That's the purpose that editors are here for, to enhance content, not delete it. Baqi:) (talk) 07:19, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject meets WP:GNG. The person's work has won significant critical attention with significant coverage in multiple reliable sources like this. The tone or formatting can be addressed through editing. Monhiroe (talk) 05:56, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per significant coverage in multiple reliable sources identified in this discussion that shows a pass of WP:GNG. LKBT (talk) 07:30, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article looked promising but it is part of the "Opinion" section of Business Standard. Regardless, I'm not seeing WP:THREE as the rest of the coverage is routine. The author is blocked for sockpuppetry, so this might be eligible for speedy deletion under WP:G5. Yuvaank (talk) 22:42, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 22:54, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fails WP:GNG. The articles are more about the company and federation than a profile on him. Agnieszka653 (talk) 18:35, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Some media focuses on the company, while several emphasize the subject (Panda) as the source of inspiration. The subject meets WP:GNG and WP:NBIO with strong coverage in reliable sources like Business Standard, New Indian Express, Boston University and others. Taabii (talk) 11:51, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The sources in the article do not meet WP:SIGCOV. Citing The Economic Times, BusinessLine, and The New Indian Express as being reliable sources when the pages being cited in question in the article are simply an author profiles shows a misunderstanding of what WP:GNG requires. Other articles mentioned in this discussion smell like promotional pieces. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 15:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clear Premium Water

(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. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:03, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Gujarat. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:03, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A 'premium' bottled water brand which is just...regular tap water (they don't detail their water sources here or on their website) and just talks about branding opportunities and pitchmen. Nathannah • 📮 17:29, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It is a popular brand and has received significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV). The existing articles provide in-depth coverage beyond routine announcements and are reliable sources, such as Entrepreneur, Economic Times, and VCCircle. The subject has also been covered in reputable sources (WP:RS) like India News, APB Live, and Hindustan. Baqi:) (talk) 12:27, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indian editors are not including WP:NEWSORGINDIA for fun and the sources mentioned are unfiltered press releases (70 families getting a water source is nothing). We don't care who they pay to get water rights or get to push their water during sporting events, we care about reliable sources about what the company is and what they do. Nathannah • 📮 23:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Any article I found about it all use the same churnalism buzzwords that are hallmarks of the paid-for puff pieces that aren't suitable for notability requirements. Moritoriko (talk) 03:15, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article is supported by non-trivial coverage from multiple reliable and independent sources, including The Hindu Business Line, Business Standard, Economic Times, and VCCircle. These sources provide more than routine announcements and contribute to establishing notability under WP:GNG.ReshamGi (talk) 14:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These sources are not enough to satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH, they are not more than routine announcements. Moritoriko (talk) 15:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 17:05, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The sources invoked by the two "keep" voters are either trivial announcements or poorly written press releases masquerading as news stories (classic WP:NEWSORGINDIA). Yuvaank (talk) 09:18, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source analysis would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Netcore Cloud

(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. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:02, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Maharashtra. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:02, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the topic is notable per NCORP, 'cause it has several reliable sigcov references, including Times of India bootstrap story about [39], Business Standard [40], BusinessMatter [41] while Economic Times also have good overview and independent thoughts on the topic. Insillaciv (talk) 12:28, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep my online search suggests, the company is old and GNG-eligible as it has significant coverage in CNBC (Tv18)Economic Times, Business Day and other. Interestingly, it also received a critical (not pleasant) highlight about how Airtel India blocked Netcore services in article Airtel blocks Netcore services (Business Standard). It should be added to the page. Once upon a daylight dreary (talk) 20:48, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete None of the above-mentioned sources satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH. The Times of India story is a PTI press release as stated at the bottom of the article. The two Economic Times articles are trivial acquisition announcements. It takes roughly five seconds to see that the Business Matters article is a self-published puff piece on "our illustrious journey". The Business Standard report does not count toward notability per WP:ILLCON. Yuvaank (talk) 22:29, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 10:07, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Deleting the articles from Wikipedia is not only the solution. I found Vanguard, Business Standard and Channel Life. Raj Shri21 (talk) 09:34, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kalpesh Mehta

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

Article about a lesser-known enterpreneur. There is nothing comprehensive about the person in any of the sources. Sources are routine and mostly PR. Does not meet WP:GNG Thilsebatti (talk) 08:26, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 08:26, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards a weak keep; after discounting all PR articles, there are some sources that offer significant coverage.Chanel Dsouza (talk) 11:40, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The subject seems to be notable, as I have found [42], [43], [44], and [45], hence it passes WP:NBIO and WP:GNG. Taabii (talk) 15:09, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There’s ample in-depth media coverage available in reliable sources, often with bylines to demonstrate GNG and ANYBIO. Zuck28 (talk) 07:12, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. My preference is to retain. The topic is noteworthy due to substantial coverage from credible sources provided in the article and anlayzed by Taabii. It meets the criteria of WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Monhiroe (talk) 08:40, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: While outlets like India TV, Business Today, and News18 are mentioned in the article, most of the coverage is either routine or promotional in nature. The sources provided by Taabii aren't in-depth, biographical sources. For someone to meet WP:GNG, we need significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources, not just passing mentions or PR-style writeups. Most of the article focuses on Mehta’s connection to Tribeca Developers, which seems to function mainly as a marketing or licensing partner for Trump-branded projects in India. That kind of association doesn't automatically establish notability, unless the individual himself has received consistent, independent media attention separate from the brand. A lot of the coverage cited feels promotional, some of it reads more like press releases than independent journalism. The sources focus more on the real estate projects than on Mehta as a notable figure, and they lack any real critical or analytical depth. Claiming this subject passes WP:NBIO seems like a stretch. There’s no clear evidence of any major impact on the real estate industry, no notable awards, and no leadership in globally recognized companies.Thilsebatti (talk) 09:45, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sources provided by me are not about the company, these are about the subject hence these are independent of the subject. And these articles shed light on Mehta's career path, business choices, and overall influence on the growth of real estate in India. He receive substantial coverage in numerous credible, independent publications, so these are not merely passing mentions. A legitimate claim to notability under WP:GNG and even WP:NBIO is supported by that type of industry influence as well as sustained media attention over time. Taabii (talk) 08:23, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Old-AgedKid (talk) 12:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom, most of the sources are routine or PR. Quite a few are also WP:NEWSORGINDIA. There isn't enough WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS to support WP:NBIO.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:49, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the coverage concentrates on projects but many of them highlight Mehta as the inspiration behind them. Your claim of WP:NEWSORGINDIA and WP:RS is not correct for each reference. There are references which are in-depth, independent and reliable. Lakturu (talk) 17:42, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There are the coverage which is Significant and from Reliable sources, meet WP:RSPSS such as Forbes and The Indian Express. Passes WP:GNG. Lakturu (talk) 17:43, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I have reviewed all the points presented by the editors mentioned above. I believe that the arguments in favor of keeping the content are more compelling. When examining the references cited in the article, it is evident that the topic is discussed in sources deemed reliable by Wikipedia (WP:RS), including Hindustan Times, LiveMint, Indian Express, and The Financial Express (India), all of which are respected newspapers. In my view, this meets the standards outlined in WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 10:38, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Source analysis is as follows.

No.	Source	Publication	Type	Reliable?	Independent?	Significant Coverage?	Notes
1	"In The Name Of The Son"	Forbes India	Article	✅🟩	✅	❌	Focuses on Trump Jr’s India strategy. Mehta is briefly named, not profiled.
2	"Kalpesh Mehta – Tribeca Developers…"	Bru Times News	Lifestyle blog	❌🟥	❌	❌	Likely self-published or promotional. Not reliable per WP:RS.
3	"Who are Kalpesh Mehta"	Moneycontrol	Article	✅🟩	✅	❌	Surface-level write-up; no sustained biographical content.
4	"Trump Org eyes towers…"	Fortune India	Business news	✅🟩	✅	❌	Project-focused. Mehta is not the subject.
5	"Godrej Group’s CEO…"	Forbes	Unrelated article	✅🟩	✅	❌	Unrelated to Mehta; irrelevant to notability.
6	"Kalpesh Mehta – The Carlyle Group"	Moneycontrol	Company profile	✅🟨	❌	❌	Likely derived from company PR. Not independent.
7	"Proud to be the largest developer…"	Financial Express	Interview	✅🟩	❌	❌	Primary source. Fails independence.
8	"Kalpesh Mehta in US for inauguration"	Economic Times	News	✅🟩	✅	❌	Brief event-based coverage.
9	"Meet Kalpesh Mehta..."	DNA India	Article	✅🟩	✅	❌	Promotional in tone. Biographical info is shallow.
10	"Trump World Center to be built…"	Times of India	Event news	✅🟩	✅	❌	Project mention; Mehta named in passing.
11	"Inside Trump Towers Gurugram…"	NDTV	Real estate article	✅🟩	✅	❌	Focus is the property, not Mehta.
12	"Trump Residences sold out…"	Indian Express	Sales news	✅🟩	✅	❌	Covers project success. Mehta not profiled.
13	"Trump project in Gurgaon…"	Business Standard	Business news	✅🟩	✅	❌	Focused on business deal, not biography.
14	"Trump Gurgaon ₹1200 crore…"	ET Now	Business news	✅🟩	✅	❌	Project-based announcement.
15	"Seen with Ambanis…"	India.com	Clickbait blog	❌🟥	❌	❌	Fails WP:RS. Poor-quality promotional source.
16	"Who is Kalpesh Mehta?"	LiveMint	Article	✅🟩	✅	❌	“Who is”–style piece. Minimal depth. Mostly tied to Trump brand.
17	"Trump inauguration partners"	Hindustan Times	Event news	✅🟩	✅	❌	Event-specific. Name-check only.
18	"Trump Indian partner in US…"	The Tribune	News	✅🟩	✅	❌	Inauguration-related; Mehta only briefly cited.
19	"कल्पेश मेहता..." (Hindi)	News18 India	News (Hindi)	✅🟩	✅	❌	Sensationalized tone. No depth of coverage.

Despite the large number of citations, none of the sources offer significant, sustained, and independent coverage required by WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. Nearly all are either project announcements, event mentions, or primary interviews lacking in-depth biographical focus. Promotional tone, "Who is" fluff, and passing name-checks dominate the coverage. There is no substantial profile in any high-quality source independent of Tribeca or the Trump brand. Thilsebatti (talk) 19:00, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 21:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thilsebatti I wouldn't say the Forbes India source "briefly names" Mehta, there are three paragraphs that focus on him. I haven't looked at other sources yet. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 22:50, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nagaon railway station

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

Other than brief mentions, Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Would have redirected ATD, but could not find a reasonable target. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:24, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, India, and Assam. Shellwood (talk) 20:58, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nagaon railway station clearly meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria under WP:RAIL. It is an active station on the Northeast Frontier Railway, serving the town of Nagaon in Assam with station code "NGAN". The station is listed in official timetables, with multiple express and passenger trains halting there daily. As a vital piece of regional infrastructure with verifiable coverage, it justifies having its own standalone Wikipedia article. Aryan^{Talk} 07:38, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you use an LLM to produce this comment? Cremastra (talk) 13:30, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - WP:RAIL is neither a policy nor a guideline.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:20, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- And it's not even an essay - it's a WikiProject, and the page (rightfully) says nothing about notability. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:32, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:15, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment Usual practice for stations about which there is no particular detail or notability claim is to redirect it to a listing of stations for the line or railroad. Mangoe (talk) 03:15, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We could use more participation and arguments for specific outcomes here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:55, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to Northeast Frontier Railway zone I would redirect to the appropriate division instead but most of those articles are incomplete, and it's not clear which division this station lies in. Mangoe (talk) 23:18, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Shahjahan (footballer)

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

Only one professional appearance, fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 13:50, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and India. Svartner (talk) 13:50, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Manipur-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:57, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Subject absolutely does meet WP:GNG with current sourcing. The amount of AfD nominations this editor has done for soccer players in a short period indicates that they are not doing WP:BEFORE. If they had, they would have also found (all in English):

This is in addition to the notable coverage already referenced in the article, as well as the likely additional coverage in the many local languages of places he has played.

Rapid-fire nominations for deletion only makes Wikipedia worse. – Ike Lek (talk) 00:55, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about an Indian player who never even pursued a professional career and only has sources mentioning a call-up for an under-17 team. I reiterate, the subject clearly fails in WP:GNG, including when compared to better articles/with more sources about footballers who only played at youth level that were also deleted. Svartner (talk) 15:19, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:23, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. The Scroll source looks OK, but not enough on its own. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 10:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The sources from Khelnow and Scroll are enough to meet WP:BASIC, because those cover stories about the person himself. I feel the article should be expanded if this AfD ended up being kept. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:06, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Read Khelnow and Scroll carefully - one is just a rehash of the other. In other words, they count as 1 source. Geschichte (talk) 12:16, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not enough for a WP:YOUNGATH. The sources go on about U12, U14 etc which amount to nothing in the sports world. Geschichte (talk) 12:17, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per above. Youth international prospect with fully pro appearances and sources. Definitely also has Indian language sources besides the English ones already here. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 03:36, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:53, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Almost all of the sources fail WP:YOUNGATH, and he only made one appearance. I almost put draftify before realising his appearance was some years ago. SportingFlyer T·C 19:24, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hindustani kinship terms

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

Unnecessary as Wiktionary has Cat:ur:Family and Cat:hi:Family. Note that this is not the same as Chinese kinship or Irish kinship as it doesn't explain the system, rather simply lists various kinship terms which isn't really encyclopædic. "Hindustani kinship" would perhaps be an encyclopædic topic, but not this. — Ö S M A N (talk · contribs) 11:39, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:42, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:30, 12 July 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 12:50, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete clearly a piece of Hindustani-English dictrionary. The words re even not used inEnglish languge. 17:43, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Chapra Christ Church

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

Lots of broken links on the page, I can't find much to replace them and can't WP:V the details JMWt (talk) 10:07, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and India. JMWt (talk) 10:07, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Kindly see the references prior to tag of deletion. Further this is a premium heritage institution of the district almost 185 years old and has separate commonsCategory which also made the article notable Pinakpani (talk) 10:16, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 2: three sentences about churches in Chapra, none of which are obviously this one (the origin date of the Roman Catholic church mentioned is different to that one the page)

Ref 3: my browser says not to open as the link is dangerous

Ref 4: is not obviously about this church and doesn't verify the contents of this page

Ref 5: a parliamentary mention about the Church Mission Society which is a British church society and not obviously anything to do with German Protestants or Roman Catholics

Ref 6: doesn't work for me

Ref 7: about the King Edward School and Chapra Protestant church. Not a Roman Catholic church

Ref 8: doesn't work for me

Conclusion none of these refs WP:V the content on the page. It's not clear whether any of them are about the subject or not JMWt (talk) 10:47, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:33, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Social media sites are what I can pull up... Nothing in Gnews, other than stories about conversions/mission work. I don't see this meets notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:14, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Bengal-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:43, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT - since at least some of the citations don't match the subject, either the creator made serious mistakes, or the sources were generated by AI. Bearian (talk) 20:46, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY. I have copy edited for translation problems, rescued deadlink citations, removed unsourced content or content that didn't seem to fit, and added info to expand the article. With regards to the AfD nomination, an article's content must be verifiable, but do not need to be online. Thus, we don't assume the content is wrong just because its source is not online. Also, MOS says to leave deadlink citations in place, so that is normal and not a problem. Thus, I don't believe the reasons behind the AfD are justifiable. Rublamb (talk) 03:41, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep after the re-write the article is much clearer and now includes the related school and details of the christmas fair with references, some offline which is permitted. So exercising WP:AGF for offline sources, deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:41, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article is about a historical church (almost 200 yers old). So, it has historical importance and has encyclopedic value. Also, the references used are quite authentic. I find no reason for the deletion of the article. Rangan Datta Wiki (talk) 14:21, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above historical church.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 14:37, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Scholarly works (Anthropological Survey of India 2002; Bhattacharya 1981) together with a full-length 2016 Anandabazar Patrika feature and other independent historical sources provide reliable coverage, and hence the subject meets WP:GNG and WP:NBUILD. Aeon Sentinel (talk) 13:58, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am not sure that some of these new sources provide WP:SIGCOV:

I can only see the Google Books preview, but Bhattacharya 1981 seems only to have a trivial mention and doesn't contain the word "Meherpur", which concerns me as it apparently supports In the 19th century, Chapra, Nadia was the center of missionary works for the Meherpur subdivision of the undivided Bengal (now West Bengal, India.
The "Christian fair" article makes up a plurality of the citations, but is only vaguely about the church -- it's really about the fair. I'm only working from a translation, but I also can't see that it supports, as claimed, The four-day fair blends traditional Christian and Indian traditions and has some 20,000 participants each year (though it does mention that the fair includes a specific Indian practice, singing kirtan). Even then, it seems to be local news, which isn't normally evidence of notability.
The High School history page isn't independent, as the school was founded by the church: in any case, it's WP:PRIMARY and WP:ABOUTSELF. Even then, the mention of the church is trivial.

The Sessional Papers source has a single trivial mention -- and is a document from the British parliament from 1904, which may fall under WP:PRIMARY.

I can't access the Diocese of Barrackpore source, but it seems likely to be a trivial/administrative mention rather than a detailed discussion.

That leaves only the Nadia District Gazetteer that I can fully vouch provides WP:SIGCOV (though even then it's not massive) within a source suitable for WP:GNG. If we only one good source provides significant coverage, the article should not be kept, but rather merged into an article about the town. I don't want to vote delete at this stage, as most of this is absence of evidence rather than secure evidence of a problem, but would be reassured if someone with access to the sources could overturn my impressions of their coverage. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I vote to keep this article because it provides valuable information about Chapra Christ Church, demonstrating its notability and relevance. With further research and reliable sources, the article can be improved to offer a more comprehensive overview of the church's history and significance. 2RDD (talk) 10:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: UndercoverClassicist's extant sourcing concerns need to be addressed to reach consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 23:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per HEY. Sometimes all we need is to cut out the AI drivel and hallucinated sources, and touch up the page, and we have a start article. I'm impressed with the rescue, since I had no hope. Of course it needs more work for a rainy day. Bearian (talk) 15:00, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I share UndercoverClassicist's concerns about the current sources. I have not been able to find a source which clearly gets this over a WP:GNG line. However a couple scholarly searches and book searches come up with at least mentions of the church including a 1904 sessional mention in British parliament. These might be mentions, but I'm confident someone with access could find something that would get this over the line. SportingFlyer T·C 20:40, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Doing my own research on the subject, I also find an abundance of RS SIGCOV establishing notability per GNG. Zach^H007 20:31, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of programmes broadcast by Zee Marathi

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

I think WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
del. Seconded. Not TV Guide, no encyclopedic content. --Altenmann >talk 21:15, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and India. Shellwood (talk) 21:15, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a NOTTVGUIDE issue here – that policy discusses electronic program guides, which would list all of the shows and episodes airing on a given day. This is a higher-level list; it mentions very basic information for each show, not every single instance of its airing. Perhaps WP:NLIST is more relevant? RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:47, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 21:00, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:20, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: A reasonable WP:SPLIT, that has navigational and informational purposes (see WP:NLIST). - Eva Ux 11:09, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohit Marwah

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

Non-notable actor. Lacks Wp:SIGCOV. Most of the sources are either passing mentions or non-bylined promotional articles. Wp:NEWSORGINDIA. His acting career consists of two films in which he has non-lead roles, and no award nominations or wins, failing Wp:NACTOR.

His additional credits include non-notable short films and music videos.

He received some press coverage due to his connection with the Ambani and Kapoor families and his marriage but notability is not inherited. Zuck28 (talk) 12:12, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Fashion, India, Delhi, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, and New York. Zuck28 (talk) 12:12, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NACTOR even WP:NBASIC, also wikipedia is not WP:INHERITED. Baqi:) (talk) 08:57, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep He had lead roles in two notable (if average) films, so just meets WP:NACTOR. See WP:ICTFSOURCES for reliable sources for Indian films - there are additional, reliable sources in the articles about the films which could be added here. It appears that he is now a managing director at a university - this [46] is not a reliable source (being sponsored content and full of peacockery), but if a reliable source could be found, that info could be added to the article to bring it up to date. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:05, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 05:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The subject meets WP:NACTOR with lead roles in two feature films. I can find references which are enough to support the case. Sooterout (talk) 17:44, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which of the sources, demonstrates that these two roles are lead roles? Zuck28 (talk) 19:02, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The actor did have significant roles in Fugly and Raag Desh. In fact, in the latter, the subject was featured on the theatrical poster, which strongly suggests that he was one of the central characters. In Fugly as well, the actor played a major role that received attention and analysis in reviews by film critics.Chanel Dsouza (talk) 12:06, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopening and relisting, in my individual capacity as an uninvolved admin, per WP:REOPEN.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:23, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Passes NACTOR through roles in Fugly and Raag Desh. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 13:21, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are no sources to verify that these roles are significant to pass NACTOR. Zuck28 (talk) 14:25, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The reviews in RS listed on the articles for both films consistently mention Marwah. I would consider this enough to verify that his roles in the films are significant enough for NACTOR. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 09:44, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source Analysis.
- Source 1 Unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
- Source 2 passing mention
- Source 3 passing mention
- Source 4 Unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
- Source 5 Unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
- Source 6 Promotional for debut release. Short article on who subject is related to and how the subject came to limelight before debut.
- Source 7 Interview. Non-Independent of the subject.
- Source 8 Same promotional article with same content as Source 6. Same publishers.
- Source 9 about Subject's wedding
- Source 10 passing mention.
- Source 11 page no available.
- Source 12 Non-Independent of the subject,
- Source 13 Same as source 6
- Source 14 article is about Akshay Marwah. Nothing on the subject.
- Source 15 Unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
- Source 16 promotional article about the subject being launched in debut Fugly.
- Source 17 passing mention
- Source 18 passing mention
- Source 19 Unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
- Source 20 just an image of subject dressed in Dior Homme
- Source 21 images of subject in fashion.
- Source 22 subject walk the ramp for Fashion designer.
- Source 23, Non-independent of the subject as new face of 'Provogue'. RangersRus (talk) 00:45, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

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

Files for deletion

Category discussion debates

Template discussion debates

Redirects for deletion

MFD discussion debates

Other deletion discussions

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

[g852-1] "Cadila Pharmaceuticals and Indrashil University Launch Tailor-Made Executive Diploma to Bridge the Campus-to-Corporate Gap in Pharma, ETEducation". ETEducation.com. 1 October 2024. Retrieved 19 July 2025.

[v922-2] De, Rajneesh (16 April 2025). "'Our Vision is to Become an AI & Emerging Tech Innovation Hub that Offers Interdisciplinary Research, Industry-Driven Projects, and Skill-Based Certifications': Prof (Dr) Dharmesh Shah, Provost, Indrashil University". APAC Digital News Network. Retrieved 19 July 2025.

[s881-3] "Cadila Pharmaceuticals and Indian Red Cross Society to train 50,000 students in CPR and First Aid". The CSR Universe. 30 January 2024. Retrieved 19 July 2025.

[b320-4] "Indrashil University holds its maiden convocation". Suger Mint. 10 February 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2025.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]