Mikhail Gorbachev

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

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

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

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

Further information

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

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

Purge page cache

watch

• 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

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2021 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The 2023 version of these awards was closed as a result of an AfD last year as a redirect (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2023). CNMall41 and at least one other editor have redirected this as per that afd's result, but they keep getting reverted by ip editors, who never improve the article. CNMall41's rationale for the other year also applies here: "Fails WP:GNG. Main page Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards exists which is also likely not notable so not seeing how this would meet notability guidelines. Cannot find enough coverage to establish it for this specific year. " Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:53, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:59, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:46, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A ceremony where competing networks are effectively excluded, so this is just a fan-voted de facto 'employee of the year' ceremony. Nathannah • 📮 20:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjay Passi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Not notable topic. Unsourced article and claims no Notability. fails WP:BIO, WP:GNG. LKBT (talk) 09:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, India, and Delhi. LKBT (talk) 09:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shalini Passi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Lacks significant coverage on reliable resources. Fails WP:NACTOR. LKBT (talk) 09:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, Entertainment, India, and Delhi. LKBT (talk) 09:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WinZO (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Issues from previous AfDs have not been resolved in this recent recreation of the article. Namely, the sources still do not meet WP:CORPDEPTH and thus fail to establish notability. Also, the third AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winzo was mistakenly closed as "soft delete", as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WinZO and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WinZO (2nd nomination) already previously existed. GTrang (talk) 04:34, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The current version of the article shows clear evidence of notability per WP:CORPDEPTH. Unlike the earlier drafts, it now includes substantial independent coverage from major, reliable news sources such as Reuters, Economic Times, Forbes India, and Inc42. These sources discuss not just funding or product launches, but significant developments like legal disputes with Hike, an antitrust complaint against Google being investigated by the Competition Commission of India, and real-world policy engagement around platform regulations.

The company has also shown measurable financial success. It reported over ₹1,000 crore in revenue in FY 2023–24 and a profit of over ₹300 crore, which is independently reported and verifiable. The platform is expanding internationally, including a $25 million investment to launch in Brazil, again covered by independent sources.

The article now meets notability criteria because it documents more than routine coverage, it includes sustained, in-depth reporting on conflicts, legal challenges, and its role in shaping digital policy. This is a notable player in India's online gaming and digital economy space. Previous concerns about PR-heavy content or lack of depth no longer apply. Recommend retaining the article. Sahi1up (talk) 05:12, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use an WP:LLM rationale. Nathannah • 📮 20:14, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, Websites, and Delhi. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games, Companies, and India. AllyD (talk) 07:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The applicable guideline for this page since it is a company would be WP:ORGCRIT. None of the sources fall under that as they are all churnalism, NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable. LKBT (talk) 09:53, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and salt Fails WP:ORGCRIT. Repeated recreations suggest a need to WP:SALT the page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt all material seems promotional. we are now at afd #4, so salting is necessary Bluethricecreamman (talk) 14:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I see some press release type articles, but there are enough sources to establish notability.Darkm777 (talk) 18:57, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sialkot Dagger (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find reliable sources for this term. It is possible that this area is referred to by a different term for which there are sources. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:19, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Pakistan, and India. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:19, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Portuguese wiki does seem to show that it is called the Akhnoor Dagger or Chicken's Neck. No comment on notability at this time. SportingFlyer T·C 07:18, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: Salient (geography) is the generic term for this kind of feature. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Jammu and Kashmir-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:14, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and move to "Akhnoor Dagger" or return the article to "Chicken's Neck (Pakistan)", its title until an undiscussed move yesterday. While the name "Sialkot Dagger" is unreferenced, the place itself is notable as Akhnoor Dagger or Chicken's Neck. I have added some references to the article. —  AjaxSmack  15:49, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for adding these references. I hadn't given any preference in my nomination statement, but I'm now suggesting that Move to "Akhnoor Dagger" seems to be the best option. I would argue that the term "Sialkot Dagger" doesn't have any reliable references for it and should be deleted once it becomes a redirect, but that might be an argument to be made at RFD later. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B. R. Deepak (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article should be deleted because the subject doesn’t meet Wikipedia’s rules for notable academics or public figures. It appears to be written by the subject himself, raising concerns about autobiographical bias. His h-index and i10-index are much lower than what is normally expected for a professor in the Humanities. The only proof that he won a major Chinese award is a dead link, and no other reliable sources confirm it. Charlie (talk) 05:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and India. Charlie (talk) 05:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uppu Kappurambu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Sources are primarily press releases, passing mentions and non-independent sources. Devdiscourse.com has no byline, newsrelease.in is a press release site and the articles published on June 16th and 19th are also press releases. Similarly, Amazon’s announcements on March 19th and 20th are promotional materials about their lineup. None of the sources provide in-depth coverage of the film’s production, as they are generated from the trailer launch. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:25, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:25, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Jeraxmoira Thank you for your feedback and for taking the time to review the Uppu Kappurambu article again. I understand the concerns regarding the initial batch of sources being primarily promotional in nature. To address that, I’ve now added new references from reliable, independent, and well-established publications, including, Filmfare, Deccan Chronicle, The New Indian Express,The Times of India. These updated sources provide independent editorial coverage of the film and go beyond simple announcements or press releases. They discuss the film’s premise, cast, production details, and streaming release, contributing significantly to establishing notability under Wikipedia’s general notability guidelines. Kindly requesting a fresh look at the article in light of these improved sources. If there's anything specific that still needs to be addressed, Please do let me know, I'm open to work on it!

  Cheers! Thesazh (talk) 12:03, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The two latest sources you added do not have a byline. The article from newindianexpress.com was provided by Press Trust of India, indicating that it is a press release. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Jeraxmoira the coverage does not appear to be promotional in tone but rather provides factual reporting on the film’s release, plot, cast, and context within the industry, which I believe contributes to demonstrating notability, That said, I am continuing to look for more independent reviews or interviews that provide deeper coverage. I’d be grateful for any further guidance or specific types of sources you’d recommend in strengthening the article’s standing.

  Thanks! Thesazh (talk) 06:14, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kalam: The Missile Man of India (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Hasn't yet begun filming, and fails WP:NFF. Kailash29792 (talk) 02:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify Fails WP:NFF. Filming has not begun and there is nothing notable about the production. Epicion (talk) 06:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:51, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bengali Modernist Literature (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

See WP:NOPAGE. The article has nothing that hasn't been already covered in Bengali literature. Capitals00 (talk) 03:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The topic is not completely covered in the Bengali Literature page. For example, the States of the India page only shows the Indian states and their capitals, but another page is needed for detailed discussion of those states.

For example, there is a description of Sangam literature in Tamil literature, but there is a separate page for Sangam literature for its detailed description. So please remove the deiltation tag. पांडेजी की बिकिपीडिया (talk) 06:57, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:46, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sagar Shah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Unable to find any independent coverage, as almost all of the sources are either interviews or passing mentions in unreliable or unbylined sources. Not enough to meet WP:GNG. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, and India. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Snow keep. Interview sources are more than fine. There are plenty of them: e.g. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Sportsfan77777 (talk) 14:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, it's completely absurd to think this person might not be notable. They founded the most successful chess journalism / media company ever, and are one of the most well-known media figures in chess. The nominator lacks the WP:COMPETENCE to be familiar with the subject and did not put adequate effort to look for sources. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 14:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources from chessbase.in are WP:SPS, and thesportzplanet.com, perlenvombodensee.de, and fountainink.in are more like blogs with little or no editorial oversight. To clarify, ChessBase has existed since 1986 and the Indian version was only co-founded by him. Claiming that “they founded the most successful chess journalism/media company ever, and are one of the most well-known media figures in chess” reflects your bias and is not policy based. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, Perlen vom Bodensee is not just a blog, [8], it is a very reliable source, also trusted by de-wp, for what it's worth. - Squasher (talk) 13:18, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please double check? Because from what I see, the only author who consistently writes on Perlen vom Bodensee is Conrad Schormann, who is also the founder. Six articles were written by Stefan Löffler and a few by Roland Neumeier. The translated DE wiki article states that "The site's editor is Conrad Schormann, who is supported by a team of 18 authors.", which I believe is misleading based on what I’ve seen so far and the fact that the article has very few edits also doesn’t help its reliability. In any case, having a page on DE wiki doesn’t automatically make the source reliable, especially since the standards on EN wiki are significantly higher, which I believe you already know. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:34, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to add or to check. I saw the article this afternoon by chance and also the the AfD, with a comment I did not completely agree and just wanted to leave a note that might help. The source is viewed as reliable in de-wp by the chess portal, if you do not agree, that is fine for me. Sagar Shah is at least in my eyes a relevant topic for someone like me, who follows chess purely from an interested viewer point of view. He is very well known in the chess eco system, in de-wp he is notable already just by having reached the IM title. If he doesn't meet the criteria here, because no sources can be found, that are seen as sufficient, so be it. - Squasher (talk) 20:19, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtnut (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:38, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:38, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I think the Forbes article provides WP:SIGCOV, and probably also Business Standard India but that's behind a paywall. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:36, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Haryana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:47, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oswald Labs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disability, Technology, and Netherlands. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There are a great number of articles published in respectable and trustworthy sources to assert the subject's notability. WP:NCORP is a meeting. LKBT (talk) 10:25, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Micro Tech Global Foundation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Organizations, Education, Sports, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LetsTrack (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Haryana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:53, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fluentgrid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. Furthermore, the WP:BEFORE check has failed and not a PUBLIC/WP:LISTED company, as it claims on the page. Current page is just a WP:SPAM, full of company products and services links WP:NOTADVERT. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 15:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 15:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep. The article doesn't seem to have any problems. According to WP:SIRS, it is notable. Earth605 (talk) 16:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and Andhra Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:33, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, but clean up. The company has potentially hundreds of instances of coverage in reliable sources. This article does it no justice. FalconK (talk) 02:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PatnaBeats (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 15:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Bihar. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 15:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:35, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. WP:NOTINHERITED; basically all coverage about this is passing mentions in relation to a local booster media campaign that may or may not be notable, but that does not make the facebook page and website notable. Some of the sources cited merely contain photo credits for this site. FalconK (talk) 03:03, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cybage (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. As of now, the page is a WP:PROMO TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Maharashtra. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:57, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. If kept, the only topic in here would be the controversy its office construction project appeared to cause, which is very WP:MILL. As it stands, this page is a promo created by an SPA. FalconK (talk) 03:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kinara Capital (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 14:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 14:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Karnataka. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:35, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. There are a couple sources, which present a more balanced picture than this spam article; see [9]. However, as a bank, it's very run of the WP:MILL and its problems do not appear to be systemically important. Coverage outside of trade press is extremely minimal. FalconK (talk) 03:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:SERIESA, WP:NOTWEBHOST, and WP:MADEUP. The page reads like a prospectus, not an encyclopedia article. We are not a web host. This company has won a bunch of made up in a day awards; the company might be real, but the awards are of the "20 top ranked companies in Western Upper Bangalore" or Participation trophy type. Every article that steals our bandwidth, every single SPA who uses our trust, is a brick for the richest man in the world to use as ammunition to take away our charitable dollars. Bearian (talk) 22:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tumbledry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi

  Tumbledry is a leading laudromat chain in India that opened and organized the commercial clothes cleaning market segment in the country. They have over 1200 stores in India and it is a feat in itself, considering that they are profitable and have been essentially bootstrapped. Their franchise model has benefitted many in India and a lot have also achieved profitability.

  The information of the content has been sourced from leading mainline publications in India and many articles cover the startup in depth. Please suggest the links that you feel are surface-level. I will do my best to find alternate links. If you feel any other improvements need to be made, please do mention. I will be happy to work on the content again. Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 16:30, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Please use your own words, we heavily discourage WP:LLM use in any project discussions. Nathannah • 📮 19:34, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi Nathannah

  These are my own words. Not sure how this is sounding LLM-derived content. I am sorry, but this is how I write. Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 05:19, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Sources for this are plagued by WP:RSNOI problems, for example [10] which is obviously not independent. Profiles and inclusions on lists are generally no good for showing notability; a company has to become socially significant and therefore will receive in-depth, contextualized coverage in multiple WP:RS before a Wikipedia article is appropriate. FalconK (talk) 03:17, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi FalconK

  I can research and look for more reference links. I am not sure why Ref 1 is deemed 'obviously not independent', because I don't see a disclaimer or a similar suggestion there. What I am understanding is that profile-based articles should be ignored. Please correct me if I am wrong and also share guidance. Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 05:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's more nuanced than that, but it's quite rare for profiles in the business press to be useful in establishing notability because the business press is notorious for doing these profiles in exchange for cash or access, rather than as a result of genuine public interest in the subject. The source, Prime Insights Magazine, does not have a discernable editorial policy; we can't even tell if or how they fact-check; this makes the source unreliable. It does not have an ISSN. No databases seem to index it. The article has no byline. This all makes it seem somehow even less reliable than the sources mentioned as being suspect in WP:RSNOI. The article appears to rely, for all its information, on the subject itself and quotes from people closely associated with it (such as its founders); this makes it a dependent source. It describes the company in glowing superlatives, while doing little to contextualize the company, so it does little to establish notability. FalconK (talk) 06:54, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi FalconK

    Thank you for the explanation. It was helpful. I also checked the ISSN and found that it doesn't exist. This is a new learning for me.

    I have removed this citation. Hope this helps. I am keen on retaining the page because of the credibility and authenticity of the business. I believe that 1200 stores across India is a significant and notable feat. Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 16:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:SERIESA, WP:NOTWEBHOST, and WP:RS. The page reads like a franchise agreement, not an encyclopedia article. We are not a web host. The sources are not reliable; trade magazines tend to publish verbatim information that is handed over to them. Again, the more of this type of page is further ammunition for the richest man in the world to persuade his on/off patron to destroy our business model. Bearian (talk) 22:41, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi Bearian

  This page is not a franchise agreement or being developed with ulterior motives. There is base for notability which lies in multiple facts, including:

  1. The business has attempted to organize the laundry operations segment in India. No other company has done that before Tumbledry.
  2. They have over 1200 franchisees in India.
  3. Their business model is unique and has helped entrepreneurs across India through its franchisee model.
  4. They have never raised external funding and have already reached breakeven point in revenue terms. A lot of startups end up taking funding for the sake of it. Also, it is unfair to claim that all content published by trade magazines is paid content. This is entirely baseless. I do not treat Wikipedia as a webhost. This is a grave misinterpretation that you are making and I would request you to refrain from making such suggestions. While I am happy to edit the article to ensure that it meets Wikipedia's guidelines, I would request you to share pointed suggestions for improvement.

  Supriya.jain2511 (talk) 10:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pathaan (YRF Spy Universe) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I don’t think this needs its own article yet. Pathaan as a character has appeared only in one full film (Pathaan) and a small cameo in Tiger 3. There are no detailed, reliable sources covering the character alone. Suggest merge to film or YRF Spy Universe page. ইমরান ভূইয়া (talk) 15:27, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:36, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:54, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:55, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:55, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:56, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to YRF_Spy_Universe#Pathaan. I was looking to see what could be merged and offhand, I don't really see much that needs to be merged. Someone could add some comments about the character's development if there is sourcing for that, but it wasn't in the article so that's not really a merge as much as it's an improvement. Otherwise the fictional biography is more or less already covered in the main article - it's not as in-depth, but with sections like that it would run the risk of putting undue weight on the characters section.

As far as independent notability goes, I couldn't find anything that focused on the character in specific. There's mention in relation to the film's development and reviews, but not really anything like "best character ever" or "themes of character", which is what would be needed for establishing character notability. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:45, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anshuman Magazine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Soft deleted, then draft denied. Original AFD rationale, which I agree with: Mentions, interviews, and unreliable sources (mainly WP:NEWSORGINDIA) is all I can find. Fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG. I also suspect WP:UPE. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:33, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, India, and Delhi. UtherSRG (talk) 12:33, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging the only participant of the previous AFD: @CNMall41: - UtherSRG (talk) 12:36, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - As per the first discussion. Nothing I can find since the last which shows notability. Would suggest salting the title based on the second AfD and the creator objecting to the WP:ATD they were afforded prior to moving back to mainspace. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:26, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No significan award or work which proves it ito be a notable profile. Fails WP:PERSONAlmandavi (talk) 05:27, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Premier League on television (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No need for this to be a separate article from Indian Premier League. Vestrian24Bio 10:43, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Cricket, and India. Vestrian24Bio 10:43, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Indian Premier League#Broadcasting largely per WP:NOPAGE. This topic is adequately covered at the redirect target. Frank Anchor 12:25, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: First off, this was intended as a place to reinstate some history regarding the history of its broadcast rights that had been unilaterally removed by another editor without explanation, while allowing the main article to have more of a streamlined summary. In addition, this article is modeled after several similar articles in American sports, including National Football League on television and Major League Soccer on television, with the possibly of including more details about things like the production, notable personnel, etc. ViperSnake151  Talk  17:03, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Vestrian24Bio 01:38, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Indian Premier League#Broadcasting which covers the topic suitably. We don't need a separate page with this level of detail into the broadcasting, the summary already in IPL article is sufficient. The keep vote seems like WP:OSE. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:16, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: It meets all Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion. Milicz (talk) 18:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Initially even I thought that this article should be redirected, but when I looked at similar such articles of NFL and NHL, I realised that when the league will grow in years, broadcasters will change and there will be too much information to keep on the main IPL article. So we can put it all here and only summarise there. Also we can include various broadcasting/viewership records and stats here.

So I support in keeping this article here, as said above by other users aswell. Editking100 (talk) 21:26, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Editking100: see WP:OSE, Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Vestrian24Bio 03:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument when the league will grow in years, broadcasters will change and there will be too much information to keep on the main IPL article is WP:CRYSTAL-based speculation. When and if the league grows and there becomes too much information to keep on the main IPL article, adding a spin-off article can be considered. But certainly not now. Frank Anchor 14:46, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Marwah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non notable businessperson. The sources are mostly primary/press releases or broken links. Fails Wp:GNG. Created by a blocked user. Zuck28 (talk) 02:30, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Actors and filmmakers, India, and Delhi. Zuck28 (talk) 02:30, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Seems to be notable but lacks significant coverage. I suggest to improve the article with the notable news links.Almandavi (talk) 05:30, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sea and Coast (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable, lacks wp:SIGCOV in secondary reliable sources. The majority of the sources are primary and not in depth. Also the article was created and extensively edited by blocked socks in the past. Zuck28 (talk) 02:18, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, News media, India, and Delhi. Zuck28 (talk) 02:18, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep On the basis of WP:SIGCOV, This topic demonstrate notability and meets WP:GNG. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:23, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Which sources demonstrate the notability/has SIGCOV? As far as I can see, I can only count this. ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:44, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The subject appears to not meet the notability guidelines WP:GNG. From looking at the sources, they are mainly mentions, listings, partnerships (shown by the last two sources in the article) and etc. this comes from a website whose reliability is questionable, as a site that lists all businesses, and the page is promotional in nature. this source is probably the only one that count towards WP:GNG but it is clear this is not enough. I tried to search for the subject online but failed to find any.ToadetteEdit (talk) 10:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Kanker clash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable clash. Fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 20:42, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and India. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 20:42, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, and Chhattisgarh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Strongly Oppose:

The Article is part of a wider Naxalite-Maoist insurgency in india which have been ongoing for decades, its a low-level insurgency for past many years so mass casuality events are rare.

Only two articles represent a mass casuality event in the insurgency in the whole year of 2024 one is above mentioned and the other being 2024 Abujhmarh clash, so it not just a regular news and the event have been reported by Foreign media outlets, which is rare.

From a wider perspective, articles that represent mass casualities of the maoist rebels have been targeted for deletion recently. Eg:-

• 2024 Kanker clash
• 2025 Bijapur clash
• 2025 Abujhmarh clash

It is part of a larger operation ongoing since 2024 to end the insurgency by March 2026.

While articles which portray Government casualities have been left out from deletion even though they are underdeveloped and represent less casuality events like

• 2021 Sukma-Bijapur attack
• 2017 Sukma attack
• 2018 Sukma attack
• 2023 Dantewada bombing
• 2025 Bijapur Naxal attack

Deleting this article and leaving out the others will shift the neutrality of the Insurgency, with possible downplaying rebel casualities and highlighting government casualities observed for wikipedia viewers. Golem469 (talk) 08:47, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Bijapur clash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Another routine clash, no lasting effects. Fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 20:38, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and India. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 20:38, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Chhattisgarh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:43, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Stong Oppose: The Above mentioned 2025 Bijapur clash is part of a wider Naxalite-Maoist Insurgency in india, which have been ongoing for decades. As of 17 June 2025,the above mentioned incident was the single event causing most casualities for the rebels in 2025. The incident was reported by foreign media which is rare and would not occur if it was a regular clash. Only Four articles exist in 2025 linked to incidents in Insurgency, the other three being 2025 Abujhmarh clash, 2025 Bijapur Naxal attack, Operation Black Forest.

As in a wider perspective, articles that portray mass rebel casualities have been targeted recently for deletion. For example:-

• 2024 Kanker clash
• 2024 Abujhmarh clash
• 2025 Bijapur clash

While articles that portray Government casualities or articles that are poorly written or portray less notable events and casualties are kept in wikipedia like:-

• 2021 Sukma-Bijapur attack
• 2017 Sukma attack
• 2018 Sukma attack
• 2023 Dantewada bombing
• 2025 Bijapur Naxal attack

The above mentioned articles are of the same insurgency as the 2025 Bijapur clash, many are less notable event than this. Deleting the article will automatically shift the neutrality of wikipedia, with possible portrayal of only Government casualities events and downplaying rebel casualities by deleting those articles. Golem469 (talk) 09:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Abujhmarh clash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. After a brief period of coverage, this incident was forgotten. There are no sources beyond May. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 20:21, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and India. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 20:21, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Chhattisgarh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:43, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Terrorism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:36, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep:

According to WP:NOTNEWS, it discourages documenting every routine or transient news event, this is not one. The article does not summarize daily news, but rather a major event.

Presents lasting consequences, such as shifts in the decades long insurgency, since the leader of Maoists Nambala Keshava Rao was killed in the event, who leaded the group for many years and regarded as tye most wanted maoist in india.

WP:EVENT says that a military or political event may be notable if it has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources and has broader implications.

The 2025 Abujhmarh clash involves organized armed conflict in a geopolitically sensitive region indicating lasting socio-political relevance beyond simple news reporting.

The clash reflects a pattern of ongoing Maoist insurgency, which is widely documented and considered a national security concern. This establishes enduring encyclopedic interest.

The event also even got analysis from post-event sources establishing that the event has had a sustained impact.

Many military clashes or terror-related events (even with limited source dates) are maintained on Wikipedia because they are part of wider historical and conflict narratives (eg: minor battles in Iraq War, Naxalite incidents in past decades).

Deleting such an article would be inconsistent with established treatment of similar entries like:

2010 Dantewada ambush

2021 Sukma-Bijapur ambush

2013 Naxalite attack in Darbha valley

Artiicles like this exists which may not have a broader implications on the insurgency but the 2025 Abhujmarh Clash, truly have a impact on the insurgency.

• Golem469 (talk) 05:31, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nisar Rahmath (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article was previously moved to draft space due to concerns about notability and insufficient coverage in reliable, independent sources. I reviewed the draft and declined it for lacking significant coverage to meet the general notability guideline (GNG). However, the creator has since moved it back to mainspace without addressing the sourcing concerns. While the subject has received an award, I believe it is not sufficient on its own to establish notability without substantial independent coverage. I'm bringing this to AfD so that other editors can review the article and share their opinions on whether it meets Wikipedia's notability standards. Afstromen (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Afstromen (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep – Nisar Rahmath received the Kerala State Film Award for Best Costume Designer, an official and notable recognition by a government cultural body. The article is supported by coverage in reliable and independent sources, including a feature profile in Deccan Chronicle and an interview in Manorama Online, both of which discuss his background, career, and achievements in detail. Shakheeb (talk) 17:56, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Shakheeb, I've removed what appears to have been an accidental duplicate !Vote of yours. Just making a note of it here for clarity sake. Netherzone (talk) 19:29, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:07, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, and Fashion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Pune bridge collapse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:NOTNEWS. Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. XYZ1233212 (talk) 15:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, India, and Maharashtra. XYZ1233212 (talk) 15:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:06, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete just another everyday low fatality accident in India. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 16:31, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: It was a huge tragedy well documented by press. It must be too soon to write . Maybe drafting would be good idea. QueerEcofeminist🌈 19:07, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I can't find reliable sources published about the collapse since ones that were published the day of or a day after. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 20:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TheToolX (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No reliable sources, fails WP:GNG.   haj • talk   11:06, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Websites.   haj • talk   11:06, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  can u please let me know the reason for deleting this page. Helio112 (talk) 11:11, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: sources seem to be largely self published, UGC or press releases. Article reads as promotional and there isn't any claim to notability. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 11:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per DandelionAndBurdock's assessment; article is promotional and subject fails GNG. MidnightMayhem 12:25, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:54, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This was just published 17 minutes ago -theinscribermag.com/how-thetoolx-com-became-a-viral-platform-for-online-tools-everyone-can-use/, unsigned/staff writer and reads like a promo regardless and it's blocked by the spam filter here. I don't see any coverage we can use to show notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:54, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:GNG and promotional. Madeleine (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Zero reliable third-party sources. I became aware of this AfD because of the blacklist hits; relying heavily on blacklisted PR sites is usually a strong sign that a topic is not notable.OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:59, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No WP:RS Schützenpanzer (Talk) 13:52, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The RajaSaab (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NFF. Attempted to move to draft space but that was objected to. Users keep changing the name and redirect names as well. Film was supposed to be out in April hence why I did not send to AfD sooner. Now it has been delayed yet again with an "anticipated" date of December 2025. Sources are all the normal promotional announcements you would get for a film, but nothing notable about the production that I can find to allow it to meet NFF. CNMall41 (talk) 08:10, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. CNMall41 (talk) 08:10, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – There appears to be sufficient coverage of this film in reliable, independent sources, and additional coverage is likely as the release date approaches. This will support the article’s verifiability and provide more material for improvement and citations. Per Wikipedia:Notability (films), a film can be considered notable even prior to release if it has received significant attention from reputable media outlets. Therefore, the subject meets the notability criteria for retention. Amadavadi (talk) 13:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What sources? "Additional coverage" in the future equates to WP:TOOSOON. Yes, a film can be considered notable prior to the release but needs the sourcing to show it. The sourcing here is all your general announcements associated with an upcoming film. What about the production is notable as that is what needs to be seen to meet WP:NFF. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:56, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you deleting the page even after the teaser?

It seems the movie fanwars reached wikipedia too. 2409:40F4:24:7D54:A0A0:E393:F3B6:5FC3 (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The teaser was released today ইমরান ভূইয়া (talk) 10:11, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I do not see anything in WP:NFILM that says notability is based on a teaser. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:56, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He is doing typical fanwar on wikipedia page. 2409:40F4:24:7D54:A0A0:E393:F3B6:5FC3 (talk) 16:38, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

”Keep” Notable movie with reliable sources. Teaser just dropped. It could be improved with references. Don’t Get Hope And Give Up

Sounds familiar. Please see WP:ATA. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:56, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Being a telugu from Andhra, I can see that all the mainstream Telugu newspapers have carried articles about the film apart from some notable national media outlets like the HIndu, India Today, Times of India etc. I believe it passes GNG. Davidindia (talk)

Which sources again? No one has been able to provide those as of yet. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:07, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The shooting set is confirmed to be the biggest for a horror movie in India. The makers claim it is the largest indoor movie set in the world, but I have not looked into how true that is. I think a case can be made that, even in the unlikely situation The RajaSaab never sees the light of the day, it would be notable as an unreleased film. 2001:8F8:172B:3F78:2D8E:A230:148B:5E00 (talk) 20:46, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Possible. And at least someone is providing references with their contention so thank you for that. If the claim is true, it may "possibly" be notable but it is just a claim with churnalised sources at the moment.--CNMall41 (talk) 21:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The article is well sourced and on track to release this December. It does meet WP:NFILM as it is a tentpole and not an indie or art film. Kailash29792 (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Still waiting on the sourcing from someone. Can you point to the significant coverage showing WP:GNG as it definiately does not meet WP:NFF as an unreleased film. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:27, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The article has good sources along with one of the top Indian star in cast Prabhas, so why it should stay in draft? Also it's beyond my understanding that an article with 50+ sources, Top notch indian actors and sequel to 2019 blockbuster film is still in the draft section Draft:War 2 (2025). The production of film is huge it was shot in various overseas countries, article is well sourced, production is YRF, release date in August, teaser already released! Then what's the issue! MNWiki845 (talk) 16:35, 17 June 2025 (IST)

It should stay in draft because it does not meet WP:NFF. Nothing in notability guidelines that says it receives inherent notability for having good sources or top Indian stars. If you are comparing to War 2, that draft has way better sourcing and at this point could be argued that meets WP:GNG. So the question is why should that stay in draft if this one is live? Also, still waiting on the source assessment which no one has yet to provided. The IP vote above is the only one that has made a claim of notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Principal photography is complete, so the film doesn't fall under the NFF's restriction on covering projects that haven't begun filming. There are 35 sources in the article. GNG is established. DeluxeVegan (talk) 17:02, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fifth request for sourcing. 35 sources, all of which are promotional, NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:26, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't non-RS. Indian sources are going to cover Indian entertainment; using NEWSORGINDIA to treat them like they're inherently suspect will leave our film articles empty. WP:SATISFY. DeluxeVegan (talk) 18:06, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I never said they were all NEWSORGINDIA and no, you are not obligated to WP:SATISFY. The vote just leans more towards WP:ATA. Sources do not need to be non-Indian sources, but they do need to be something more than your typical press announcements, churnalism, promotional material, or unreliable sourcing. That is why [[WP:NFF] exists. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:54, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Here are a few references regarding the production of the film. [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]. I hope these references will be good enough for the article to satisfy WP:NFILM as well WP:GNG.

BhikhariInformer (talk) 12:25, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uttarakhand Helicopter Crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:NOTNEWS. Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. XYZ1233212 (talk) 17:01, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, India, and Uttarakhand. XYZ1233212 (talk) 17:01, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: helicopter crashes are generally "routine" accidents and generate no significant coverage beyond the initial news cycle. Nothing about this crash suggests any likelihood of the "enduring significance" mentioned in WP:EVENTCRIT#4. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:48, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Jalgaon train accident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:NOTNEWS. Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. XYZ1233212 (talk) 16:03, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, India, and Maharashtra. XYZ1233212 (talk) 16:03, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep 13 people died in this event, which is far beyond a routine occurrence. The event was covered as national news and got a response by the country's prime minister, which is also beyond routine coverage. This also meets GNG. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:08, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Will be helpful for future research, there are reliable source cited. Allblessed (talk) 18:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

R. S. Nandakumar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Promotional piece by coi/upe editor. He gets a few mentions, but not the type of in-depth coverage needed to show they meet WP:GNG. And they do not meet any of the criteria to pass WP:NSCHOLAR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, and India. Shellwood (talk) 14:06, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete notwithstanding the latest refbombing of every WP:PASSINGMENTION available. Also sanction Supersumu for ToU/PAID violations (demonstrated by their sneaking this one back in under a new name. —Fortuna, imperatrix 14:45, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:21, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• :DO NOT DELETE.

  Its not a new name. As you can see, the previous page (r s nandakumar) was blanked and then deleted by me. In India, the Surnames are abbreviated into initials that need "."; the family of the person who is the subject of this article requested for the change.@

  This wiki page now has no negative links nor does it have 404s showing in sources. Sources have been extended to include articles, journals and news sources from 20+ years.

  Please advice on what else one can do to improve the article. Thank you. Namaste. Supersumu (talk) 17:57, 15 June 2025 (UTC)— Supersumu (talk • contribs) is blocked for having used sockpuppets in this debate. [reply]

the previous page (r s nandakumar) was blanked and then deleted by me, sorry, what? It was deleted by Seraphimblade, an administrator, as being unambiguously promotional. —Fortuna, imperatrix 18:53, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, i meant to say i deleted the information in the page. I apologize, i am new to Wikipedia. I have tried to improve the page with reliable sources and links. Supersumu (talk) 18:59, 15 June 2025 (UTC)— Supersumu (talk • contribs) is blocked for having used sockpuppets in this debate. [reply]

Update is withstanding WP:GNG. Do not deleteInnathatha (talk) 18:53, 15 June 2025 (UTC)— Innathatha (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Supersumu (talk · contribs). [reply]

I apologize. Hadnt noticed the broken 404s. I have updated the article with reliable sources and links to articles, news publications and journals. Supersumu (talk) 19:01, 15 June 2025 (UTC)— Supersumu (talk • contribs) is blocked for having used sockpuppets in this debate. [reply]

Rowdy Rocky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non notable film. Doesn't satisfy WP:NFP or WP:GNG. Afstromen (talk) 13:42, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Entertainment, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 13:42, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of Bhojpuri films of 2022.--Artus Sauerfog Dark-Eon (talk) 09:47, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shaila (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Doesn't pass WP:NFP and WP:GNG. No significant coverage in reliable sources. Afstromen (talk) 13:38, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Entertainment, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 13:38, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Could we redirect this entry to the section in the list List of Hindi films of 2025#January-–March where it is mentioned? One of the sources seems sufficiently significant and reliable to allow that and some members of the cast are notable. Thank you.--Artus Sauerfog Dark-Eon (talk) 23:22, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anish Shah (Businessman) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Business person does business things. None of the refs provide WP:SIGCOV, subject fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, and India. UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:56, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in this article, Anish Shah qualifies under WP:GNG, as he's the CEO of Mahindra group which is in India's top 25 companies. And he has significant coverage in reliable, independent sources as far as I researched after founding this article via Special:Random/Draft.

So I will improve this article asap to follow the Wikipedia:GNG completly. and kindly explain this- Business person does business things so I can know what wrong I did in this so I can improve that also. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And the previous CEO of the same company has very old wiki article. Anand Mahindra Just sharing. I know it doesn't matter much. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 15:32, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@IVickyChoudhary: Being connected to a notable entity does not grant notability per WP:INHERIT. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:06, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree that notability is not inherited by association per Wikipedia:INHERIT. However, the argument for keeping this article is not based solely on Anish Shah’s role at Mahindra Group, but on his own notability, which is independently established through. Multiple reliable and independent sources that provide significant coverage of his leadership, strategic decisions, and business vision as Managing Director and CEO of Mahindra Group. Kindly search on Google about him. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 06:31, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References say he's a businessperson doing business things. That's not SIGCOV. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:11, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your review. While I understand the concern that "businessperson doing business things" doesn't automatically imply notability, I respectfully argue that Anish Shah meets the WP:SIGCOV, and WP:GNG.

He has received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources such as Forbes India, Economic Times, and Business Today, which profile his leadership, strategic direction, and impact at Mahindra Group. This coverage goes beyond routine job announcements, it reflects independent journalistic interest in Shah as an individual business leader, not merely in the company he leads. His coverage is not trivial, routine, or tied to a single event. I will continue to improve the article by adding more sources that fulfill WP:SIGCOV and will restructure the article to reflect their depth and focus. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 07:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - "Business person does business things" … and on a global scale in Choudhary's Shah's case. Mahindra Group is huge ($23 billion plus). There are Mahindra tractor dealers in farming towns across North America. I'd be stunned if Choudhary Shah isn't notable. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:43, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @A. B.: You mean Shah, right? - UtherSRG (talk) 02:10, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Ooops! Yes. Thanks. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:14, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prahtip Mitra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Subject does not have the WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:SPORTCRIT. One possible redirect is India at the 1948 Summer Olympics. Let'srun (talk) 02:12, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and India. Let'srun (talk) 02:12, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to India at the 1948 Summer Olympics#Swimming– As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 04:02, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Allblessed (talk) 17:50, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Semi-advertorialized article about a not yet released film, not properly sourced as the subject of sufficient production coverage to pass WP:NFF in advance of release. As always, the rule is not that every film is automatically entitled to an article the moment it enters the production pipeline -- generally speaking, a film is not notable until it has been released and been reviewed by professional film critics, and has to show a significant volume and depth of production coverage to claim notability in advance of release.
But this is referenced entirely to three short blurbs about the release of its promotional poster, and all three of those short blurbs are worded virtually identically despite coming from three supposedly different sources -- meaning that either one publication originated the piece and the other two just reprinted it, hence adding up to one GNG-worthy source, or all three publications essentially just published the producer's own self-created press release, hence adding up to zero GNG-worthy sources.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation after the film has been released, if it garners enough critical attention to pass GNG on proper third-party coverage -- but three virtually identical articles about the release of a film poster is not enough to get an as yet unreleased film over the notability bar all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 21:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Bearcat (talk) 21:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify: Agree with nom; appears to be WP:TOOSOON and maybe reliable sources/reviews will emerge with release in not too far future WeWake (talk) 05:54, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Destinyokhiria (talk) 09:58, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Draft: seems fine. This is PROMO at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 14:29, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Truemeds (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. References are routine announcements, mentions, funding rounds, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable. Nothing I can find meets WP:ORGCRIT. History shows this was moved to draft but then moved back to mainspace. CNMall41 (talk) 06:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 06:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:24, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I will suggest to draftify the article, there is no doubt that Truemeds is notable but article read like a PROMO. Chronos.Zx (talk) 01:18, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not notable actually. Moving to draft was originally done as an WP:ATD but that was objected to which is why were are here. Moving it back to draft without a keep or delete decision will just allow it to be moved right back to mainspace and bring us immediately back to a discussion. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:29, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I can see there are significant coverage to meet its notability criteria of a company. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:18, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:VAGUEWAVE, WP:SOURCESEXIST. You have not identified any actual coverage. One of many throw away boilerplate !votes from this individual. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:04, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Presenting sources that support claims of notability would be most helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: PROMO. No RS and even in Gscholar, it's all primary links that are too PROMO as well to be helpful. I don't see any sourcing we can use. Oaktree b (talk) 14:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Oaktree; poor article which doesn't actually elaborate on the business itself, just whatever funding it's getting. Nathannah • 📮 16:15, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhimanyu Shammi Thilakan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. No significant coverage and most sources are non-bylined churnalism, mentions, or otherwise unreliable. Previously deleted A7 and G11 under Abhimanyu S Thilakan. CNMall41 (talk) 04:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 04:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Marco (2024 film): Appears to fail GNG. Also WP:TOOSOON for NACTOR. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 18:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Pass WP:GNG.Sync! (talk) 18:28, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On which sources do you base that assessment?--CNMall41 (talk) 18:32, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:55, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arun Pradeep (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. No significant coverage. CNMall41 (talk) 20:39, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 20:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: the first two sources are the same source, one in English the other Malayalam and does provide in-depth coverage but independence is questionable as it is clear some of the content came from him (his dreams, etc.). Another source is about his wedding with a generic by-line so WP:NEWSORGINDIA and the other sources are not reliable or a press release so does not meet WP:GNG None of his roles are significant (no starring roles and toward bottom of cast lists) so does not meet WP:NACTOR either. S0091 (talk) 15:12, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  His role in Padakkalam is clearly significant and can be considered a "starring role" and is certainly not "toward bottom of (the) cast list". Please see this article in The Hindu; he's on 3 of the 4 film stills in the article. Can we redirect to the Cast section of that film (at least for now)? Artus Sauerfog Dark-Eon (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Artus Sauerfog Dark-Eon cite that Hindu source in the article so it is at least there as part of the history if it ends up either being deleted (which can be restored) or redirected. You might be right about Padakkalam...maybe not starring but at least a significant role. The only issue I have with it being redirected is he is part the cast in other works and if redirected a reader will only get pointed to one them. However, happy to defer to others though and no issue if a closer opts for that as WP:ATD. S0091 (talk) 17:55, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @CNMall41 what are your thoughts about redirecting? S0091 (talk) 18:02, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am good with an WP:ATD. Just noting that a lot of times this winds up with the redirect being undone and coming right back to AfD. Either way is fine with me. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:07, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yeah, I know it could lead to disruption in the future but that is a deal with it if it happens. I have gone ahead and added The Hindu article. Thanks Artus Sauerfog Dark-Eon for bringing it forward. S0091 (talk) 18:14, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

there is lot more to add Infinityeditor (talk) 19:54, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 02:17, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sudip Pandey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article is may not notable according to WP:NACTOR and does not meet the requirements for WP:SIG in reliable, independent sources. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Film, Asia, and India. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep despite the earlier deletion. The coverage of his death seems to just barely qualify him. Pinging Zuck28 who added Pandey to the List of Bhojpuri actors in January. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 20:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It appears that the nominator has a very low understanding of the Wikipedia guidelines. They’re just nominating random articles created by me as an act of retaliation because I nominated a few of the articles they created about non-notable subjects. Their rationale for the AFD is unclear as, why they believe it should be deleted, anyways I leave this matter for fellow editors.

  Thank you for pinging me.

  Zuck28 (talk) 20:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Non notable actor, Mentions, unreliable sources. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Nominator is currently blocked as a sockpuppet. Zuck28 (talk) 05:14, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jayshree Misra Tripathi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article does not meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR the specific notability guidelines and the sources cited in this article are not considered as WP:SIG. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Women, Poetry, and India. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delhi and Odisha. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:51, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep I have added reviews of her work, though the 2025 book is an edited book so it accounts less towards notability. I also revised the page and removed citations that were non-notable mentions of Tripathi. DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom there is nothing to demonstarte subject's notability. Fails WP:GNG. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:22, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  My argument for keep is that she meets WP:AUTHOR, not WP:GNG. Any thoughts on that? DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:35, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 04:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment:

Nominator is currently blocked as a sockpuppet. Zuck28 (talk) 10:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shantanu Naidu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails to establish notability independent of his association with Ratan Tata, per WP:GNG, WP:AUTHOR, WP:BIO, and WP:INHERITED.

His startups do not meet WP:NCORP due to modest scale and event-specific reporting, and the book lacks significant critical reviews or awards to satisfy WP:AUTHOR. Zuck28 (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, India, and Maharashtra. Zuck28 (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Zuck28, Before taking any abrupt or random action, always ensure proper research is done and all sources are thoroughly verified. Acting without accurate information can lead to serious consequences and misunderstandings. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep You can see numerous siginificant coverage on reliable sources like this: [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], and there are many more in line. Easily passes WP:GNG. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Most of these sources are about a Linkedin post he made. Two have no bylines. Toadspike [Talk] 05:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Pass WP:GNG.Sync! (talk) 18:38, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 07:14, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luis Buñuel Memorial Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non notable film festival. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources (Cult Critic is founded by the same person behind these award. The Times of India piece is obvious PR, WP:NEWSORGINDIA). Notability is not inherited from people they are named after or who they give awards to. Another from the Shailik Bhaumik/Cult Critic stable of award farms, with Cult Critic Movie Awards (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cult Critic Movie Awards), World Film Carnival Singapore (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Film Carnival Singapore), Tagore International Film Festival (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tagore International Film Festival), Calcutta International Cult Films Festival and Virgin Spring Cinefest. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:59, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:09, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Bengal-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Renting a theater and playing a bunch of films which paid to be on the schedule without any expectation of audience attendance but with the 'promise' of 'exposure' like they're on Instagram is not a film festival. Pay-for-play, and I highly doubt the Buñuel estate would endorse a random film festival in India based in an crowded apartment complex. Nathannah • 📮 23:02, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• KeepThis is a notable award. Sufficient significant coverage which are independent of the subject. Meets WP:GNG.CresiaBilli (talk) 06:29, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  And what would those sources be? As CNMall has pointed out, you've just contributed this boilerplate and nothing more to prove the sources. Why is a random thing in Kolkata promoting a film festival named after a man whose estate certainly would not approve of their namesake being part of an 'exposure only' film festival, again ran out of an overcrowded apartment complex? Nathannah • 📮 14:20, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:VAGUEWAVE, WP:SOURCESEXIST. You have not identified any actual coverage. One of many throw away boilerplate !votes from this individual. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:40, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Institute of Engineering and Technology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Does not look to be a notable institution. Barely any in-depth coverage on the same. Most of it seems to be trivial mention or paid PR Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 13:50, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 13:50, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:58, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:53, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• weak keep this is a public university with over 1000+ students and there is some coverage of it in various sources: [27] [28]. It is not extensive but probably enough for an University. --hroest 15:25, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:32, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zubair Ahmad Quraishi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable politician. All sources are either YouTube (not WP:RS) or passing mentions (not WP:SIGCOV). The only English source doesn't even mention Quraishi at all. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:48, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:48, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Self-published material on YouTube is usually not a reliable source, but a newscast from a television station that is normally considered a reliable source does not stop being reliable just because it is uploaded to YouTube. I have not viewed or analyzed the newscasts cited as references, but I think it is likely that at least some of them are reliable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:09, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:00, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:44, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - party officials, especially at the local level, are rarely notable. Maybe if they are called a political "boss" like Boss Tweed. Ping me if you find a reliable source saying something like that. Bearian (talk) 02:47, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lakshya Chawla (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable photographer. Sources consist of passing mentions, spammy advertorials, or self-published material. Not a single reliable source provides WP:SIGCOV on the subject. See also WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Noteworthy that two different SPAs have removed the COI template on this article. Yuvaank (talk) 07:47, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Photography, and India. Yuvaank (talk) 07:47, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delhi and Punjab. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable photographer, Citations consist in this article are enough to demonstrate notability of the subject. Meets WP:BASIC. [29], [30], [31], [32], and [33].CresiaBilli (talk) 13:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CresiaBilli: Can you fix your link by adding https:// before www.? Thanks Agletarang (talk) 15:26, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:03, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Nothing in-depth about he subject in reliable sources. The references provided by CresiaBilli demonstrate why WP:NEWSORGINDIA exists. Three of the four are churnalism (same topic, same photograph, and almost the same date). Clear press campaign to promote the subject which is also being attempted with Wikipedia based on the edit history. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The individual clearly does not meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Wikipedia isn't a platform for showcasing personal career achievements or work portfolio like a resume WP:NOTCV. Charlie (talk) 05:23, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: meets WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE through significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources over several years. A dedicated profile in the 2019 Bloomsbury book Young India: The Heroes of Today^[1] provides in-depth coverage, while feature articles in The Asian Age (2019), Times Now Hindi (2024)^[2], and DNA India (2025)^[3] focus on his career. HuffPost (2015)^[4], The Indian Express (2015, 2017)^[5][6], Vogue India (2022)^[7], and The Wire (2025)^[8] cover his notable projects and industry impact. The 2017 WeddingSutra award nomination further supports recognition. While Times Now Hindi and DNA India may raise churnalism concerns, their focus on Chawla’s career, combined with Yuva Bharat, Vogue India, and others, shows sustained, independent interest. I agree weak sources (e.g., TOI Mediawire) should be removed and am revising the article to remove resume-like language (e.g., CAT score) for neutrality. Cleanup, not deletion, is warranted.KKM2025 (talk) 21:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC) — KKM2025 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  • Comment: Just following up on my earlier !vote to keep — the article has come a long way since then. It's now backed by strong, reliable sources, including a full chapter in a Bloomsbury-published book (Yuva Bharat), multiple features in Vogue India, and mainstream coverage from The Indian Express, The Asian Age, HuffPost, and The Wire. These are independent, in-depth sources that clearly establish notability under both WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE. I think this directly addresses the concerns about limited coverage and promotional tone that were raised earlier. The subject has a solid career in a creative field, and now the article reflects that in a balanced, well-sourced way. Definitely a keep from me.KKM2025 (talk) 06:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    No, it hasn't. The Indian Express merely credits him for two photos sourced from his Facebook, with no coverage on him. The Asian Age piece lacks a byline and reads like a paid-for spam. HuffPost, in essence, interviews him about his wedding photography experience with a random Hong Kong-based couple. The Wire carries one quote from him. This Vogue India article is self-published by his company Shutter Down Photography, while the other is a listicle containing a passing mention. None of these sources qualify towards notability, and not much has changed since the previous AfD in 2019. Yuvaank (talk) 06:13, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 23:27, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Lack of WP:RS that meet WP:GNG. Vegantics (talk) 16:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: As per nomination. Most of the sources are non reliable. Zuck28 (talk) 03:11, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naukatola Raxaul (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Lacks significant coverage; no reason found to justify its inclusion.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 12:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 12:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Bihar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:10, 5 June 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 14:10, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - is this article listed in the Indian census for Bihar? If so, the place is notable as legally recognized. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 03:12, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I could not find it listed as a village either under this name, or as Naukatola (probably its actual name; "Raxaul" seems to be for disambiguation), Nauka (from GEOnet Names Server) or Nauka Tola. It seems to be part of Hardiya Panchayat. Peter James (talk) 16:00, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 09:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Desta Global (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

If one checks Google News and other news, the company cannot be named notable. Just random here and there blogs, mentions, wp:churnalism, newswire releases, WOW award, RMAI Flame award. The previous discussion was not representative and resulted in no consensus. Many of the sources have been already removed as spam. NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 10:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Technology, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – Of the references for DestaGlobal, Startup Success Stories India, Techcircle, Business Standard India, The Hindu Business Line (partially neutral), InterCon Dubai (YouTube), EVENTFAQS Media, Rural Marketing, and Digital Empowerment Foundation are focused on DestaGlobal’s success, awards, and positive impact. Most of these are based on the company’s claims without independent verification. The National and The Hindu are references that adhere to journalistic standards, providing neutral information about DestaGlobal’s work, but they lack detailed information. Hence, they are not sufficient to strongly support the claims. Some people may have different opinions about these two sources.-SachinSwami (talk) 7:01, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

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 14:12, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional input regarding available source material would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:07, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hai Jawani Toh Ishq Hona Hai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NFF. Attempted redirect as an WP:ATD but that was objected to. Filming has begun but there is nothing notable about the production, sources are all promotional announcements, WP:NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable. Fails WP:NFF which says " films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines." Release date is a year away as well. CNMall41 (talk) 15:06, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. CNMall41 (talk) 15:07, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The same article Wikipedia:NFF says "Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles, as budget issues, scripting issues and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended filming date. The assumption should also not be made that because a film is likely to be a high-profile release it will be immune to setbacks—there is no "sure thing" production. Until the start of principal photography, information on the film might be included in articles about its subject material, if available. Sources must be used to confirm the start of principal photography after shooting has begun."

  3 schedules (Mumbai, Goa, Uttarakhand) are confirmed to be complete per reliable sources and 4th one (UK) is almost complete (started towards end of April). So majority of the film has been shot. It satisfies the principal photography condition.

  "Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines."

  This is over-ridden by the above as I mentioned. Plus its not that film has just begun shooting. Shooting is almost close to completion Computeracct (talk) 04:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Not the proper reading of WP:NFF. Outcomes of deletion discussions have found that. 1 - If filming has not begun, it should NOT have its own page and if filming has begun then information can be put in related pages such as list, etc. as long as there are reliable sources to support. 2 - Until the film is released, it should NOT have its own page UNLESS there is something notable about the production.--CNMall41 (talk) 05:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't read about previous deletion discussions. But I am not sure how I misread the principal photography section. I'm fine with keeping this in draft mode till it becomes notable. See below. Computeracct (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Drafty – The film, scheduled for release on 10 April 2026, does not currently meet WP:NFF as it has not been released and lacks significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. Placing it on Wikipedia now could be considered promotional, as per WP:PROMO. The article will likely become notable after release through reviews and coverage. Therefore, it should remain in draft space, as it does not yet pass WP:NFF. Over the next 10 months, the frequency of attempts to move this page to mainspace and the number of editors involved will indicate whether the page is promotional in nature. I propose keeping it in draft until it meets notability criteria. -SachinSwami (talk) 16:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm fine with keeping this in draft mode till it meets notability criteria. Computeracct (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the main space title is protected then no problem, but OP has already objected to an WP:ATD. I have seen too many times where users use this as a way to circumvent the AfD process. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:20, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:47, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Insurance Academy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I don't see any sources by which to judge the school to be notable, with WP:NCORP being applicable to this private business institution. The sole reference in the article seems to be lost, but based on its title ("NIA: 100% placement with highest package of Rs 10.5 lakh per annum") and what had been referenced to it, it seems to have been a PR-push. (I don't think independent media are going out on their own to examine insurance academy placement rates and report on them.) Largoplazo (talk) 00:11, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Education, and India. Largoplazo (talk) 00:11, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:36, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NIASOM, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The prior deletion is sufficiently old; I believe it now qualifies under WP:NORG. It is a governmental unit of India created in 1980. It presently necessitates further citations to enhance its notability. Promotional content is an issue that can be reduced.CresiaBilli (talk) 08:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I'm not finding such sources to cite. Largoplazo (talk) 11:56, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VAGUEWAVE, WP:SOURCESEXIST. You have not identified any actual coverage. One of many throw away boilerplate !votes from this individual. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:03, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted to gather more thorough input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 05:25, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chattha Dynasty (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Most of the sources give information about a clan by the name of the Chatthas but nothing about any sort of dynasty. There's already a separate article for the clan any under Chattha (clan) anyway.

Given that it is hard to find any substantive information from a reliable source about a "Chattha dynasty", I feel the article should be deleted and any relevant sources or info can be moved to the article relating to the clan. Ixudi (talk) 15:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Pakistan, and India. Ixudi (talk) 15:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are Multiple sources of a Chattha principality/state.

E.g 1. http://archive.org/details/TheEncyclopediaOfSikhism-VolumeIA-d

2.

https://books.google.com/books?id=rKkPEAAAQBAJ&dq=Chattha+rule&pg=PA83

3.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?redir_esc=y&id=lD9uAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=Pir

As I explained while removing the deletion template. The name of this page is chosen as "Chattha Dynasty" because all of the ruling chieftains were from the same family.

The order being Nur Muhammad and his son Pir and Ahmad Chathha then Pir's son Ghualm Chattha and then Ghulams son Jan Chattha. So that is why "Dynasty" is an appropriate term.

If the name is the issue that can be discussed separately.

The article should stay on wikipedia space because it highlights a significant regional power in 18th-century Punjab and a less known prospect of punjabi history. Jatwadia (talk) 23:01, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These sources all refer to a Chhatha clan. Not a dynasty. Ixudi (talk) 15:21, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source 1 clearly mentions a Chattha state on page 449 if you read carefully.

Source 2 "Occupants of areas such as Rasulnagar on the border between the Punjab and afghan lands" this source proves they were independent rulers and not tributary to Afghans and had thier own teritories such as Rasulnagar.

Source 3 clearly mentions Pir Muhammad Chattha succeding a "principality" from his father.

Again the "dynasty" bit is not the issue the point being is that an independant Chattha state/principality existed which was ruled over by the same family that is why it is called a dynasty. Jatwadia (talk) 23:59, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2 more sources

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.206739/page/n220/mode/1up

Page 202 : "Ghulam Mahomed, who succeeded to the estate, succeeded also to the hatred of the Sukarchakias"

https://archive.org/details/resistance-themes-in-punjabi-literature/page/52/mode/1up?q=Chattha

Page 52 : "Of the Mohammadan tribes who Struggicd with most success to maintain their indépendence the most prominent were the Bhattis and Tarars in Hafizabad and the Chatthas in the Western half of the Wazirabad tehsil." Jatwadia (talk) 12:21, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: While this discussion appears to have no quorum, it is NOT eligible for soft deletion because it has been previously PROD'd (via summary).

Logs: 2025-05 ✍️ create

--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:01, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This appears to be original research. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:32, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mind pointing which source is Original research?? Jatwadia (talk) 00:30, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thomasfan1916 (talk) 05:30, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The concerns of the editor who nominated the article for deletion as well as any other editor have been answered. Discussion should be closed. Jatwadia (talk) 23:44, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Radheshyam Bishnoi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I recently accepted this article via AfC. The subject has significant coverage in reliable sources like The Indian Express, The Print, and Hindustan Times, mainly around his death, but with in-depth info about his life. There's also a 2021 Hindi source with substantial coverage. I believe this meets the GNG, but to ensure consensus, I think an AfD discussion would be helpful so experienced editors can weigh in. Afstromen (talk) 05:38, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Asia, India, and Rajasthan. Afstromen (talk) 05:38, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• DELETE Only obituary articles seen. That is not notable. Dualpendel (talk) 20:06, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Also found these sources on Google, [34], [35]. Afstromen (talk) 05:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Enough references to demonstrate subject's notability. [36] - This is an in-depth coverage by reliable source Mongabay, [37]- An in-depth article by Hindustan Times. AndySailz (talk) 09:38, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was his death notable? Most people have obituaries. Where is the significant coverage outside of his death? --CNMall41 (talk) 17:23, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question please. If a news article about a person's death includes substantial coverage of their early life, career, and accomplishments essentially providing in-depth information directly about the subject, does that count toward meeting the General Notability Guideline (GNG)? Or is such a source discounted just because it's related to their death?Afstromen (talk) 17:45, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reflecting on someone's life is exactly what an obituary does. If they were notable prior to the death, there would be significant coverage about their life during that time. So, unless something about the death is notable, it would not count. Otherwise, we could simply create new pages based on obituary sections of newspapers. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i wasn't aware of this. Outside his death, i found some sources [38], [39], [40].Afstromen (talk) 19:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Radheshyam Bishnoi was a celebrity in Indian conservation circles prior to his death with many stories published about his work in Hindi and English. He also won notable awards, so he seems to clear the notability bar. Naturepeople (talk) 23:17, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He was notable person before his death. He won awards from Rajasthan gov and he was featured in many popular news sites. Jodhpuri (talk) 12:23, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there coverage in reliable sources of the awards? Please provide links to the coverage in new sites and add to the article if you can. Dualpendel (talk) 20:01, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Biology and Rajasthan. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:33, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This subject has got substantial coverage in independent media like The Print, Hindustan Times, Indian Express, and other. I think it passes WP:GNG. TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:28, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 23:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Person was not notable before the death. Page is made up of mainly obituaries and reflections on his life. If he was worthy of notice prior to his death, there would be reliable sources covering his life more in-depth. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:13, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - https://www.hindi.news18.com/news/rajasthan/jaisalmer-meet-radheshyam-vishnoi-nature-lover-goes-for-100-kms-to-save-wildlife-his-spirit-inspires-5946711.html this article was published before his death. and many articles was written when he was alive.

  Jodhpuri (talk) 21:44, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The link timed out. Can you ensure you supplied the correct URL? Also, is this the only source? --CNMall41 (talk) 21:56, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

you can google Jodhpuri (talk) 04:14, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.bhaskar.com/local/rajasthan/jaisalmer/news/jaisalmer-wildlife-savior-radheshyam-bishnoi-inspiring-story-134644803.html Jodhpuri (talk) 04:15, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.bhaskar.com/local/rajasthan/barmer/jaisalmer/news/radheshyam-vishnoi-was-rewarded-with-young-naturalist-award-2021-129184236.html Jodhpuri (talk) 04:15, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://hindi.news18.com/news/rajasthan/jaisalmer-meet-radheshyam-vishnoi-nature-lover-goes-for-100-kms-to-save-wildlife-his-spirit-inspires-5946711.html Jodhpuri (talk) 04:18, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jodhpuri, the photo uploaded on Wikimedia Commons (1.68 MB) mentions "Own work." Did you take this photo yourself, or was it sourced from another website? SachinSwami (talk) 07:36, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jodhpuri:, not my job to present your contention. I conducted a WP:BEFORE and the sources you provided do not change what I found. These are quite good churnalism but nothing reliable.--CNMall41 (talk) 23:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @CNMall41,

I’m asking just to improve my understanding, could you please clarify why these sources are considered churnalism? As someone from India, I can confirm that Dainik Bhaskar is one of the top Hindi-language publications in the country and has a strong reputation. News18 is also a well-known media outlet.

Tagging @SachinSwami for his insights as well, as he is familiar with Indian news publications. Afstromen (talk) 04:40, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Also, it sounds like you are asking on behalf of Jodhpuri since this is their thread. Did you mean to reply on a different thread? I am a little confused. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:43, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you view everything with suspicion? I asked only to improve my understanding, as I clearly mentioned. It's possible I asked in the wrong place. should I have brought this up on your talk page instead?Afstromen (talk) 04:55, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Afstromen:, I asked for clarification so as not to make an unwarranted accusation. Which thread was this intended for so I can address your question?--CNMall41 (talk) 05:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment- Hi @Afstromen, I'm a bit confused about the AFD process. I have some questions. If the page was accepted from AFC, why didn't you wait for experienced reviewers to review it before nominating it for AFD? Were you worried that if reviewers sent it back to Draft, it would be harder to bring it to Mainspace again? Also, the page creator Jodhpuri uploaded a photo on Wikimedia Commons (1.68 MB) with the mention "Own work." I asked them about it here, but they haven't responded yet.- SachinSwami (talk) 07:22, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Regarding sources, Bhaskar News has written against the wrongdoings of the Indian government, and even during IT raids on their office by the central government, they continued to raise their voice against such issues. We have seen this kind of journalism, but if a news article mentions the journalist's name, that source holds more weight; otherwise, the news lacks significant value. This is because promotional or social media information, or news created based on someone submitting a story to the office, often does not include the journalist's name. Hence, such sources are not reliable. Additionally, the Young Naturalist Award by Century Asia Group is a private award, not given by the Rajasthan government. SachinSwami (talk) 07:25, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Were you worried that if reviewers sent it back to Draft, it would be harder to bring it to Mainspace again? What does it mean? Could you please be more specific?

  Well I accepted this draft because I believed it contained significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources. However, user CNMAll14 added a notability tag and raised a concern regarding the nature of the sources, noting that most reliable sources were published only around the time of the subject’s death. Due to this, I nominated the article for deletion so that more experienced editors could provide their opinion. I agree that while the sources are reliable, and have significant coverage but sources were published around the death time, which raises questions about whether the subject meets Wikipedia’s general notability guideline.

  Before nominating for deletion, I confirmed that the article had previously been moved from mainspace to draft space. I accepted the draft based on multiple reliable sources but acknowledge my responsibility to address any oversights in evaluating the nature of the coverage.

  Additionally, I did not review the image when accepting the draft, which was an oversight on my part.

  If you review my AfC history, you will see that I take conflict of interest issues seriously and do not accept drafts when COI concerns are present. I also request COI disclosures as needed. Afstromen (talk) 08:07, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Jodhpuri, Please answer here about your uploaded photo on Wikimedia commons. read Wikipedia’s Conflict of Interest (COI) guideline, and disclose whether you have any COI.Afstromen (talk) 08:19, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  CNMall41 had also tagged the second page. Did you check the page you accepted? And did you bring it to AFD? The answer to that is "no."

  So, I have doubts about your review of the AfC history for that page. I created the page Nagamani Srinath, which was declined by Greenman and Gheus, with significant comments from them. Those comments were helpful for me to understand how to create pages properly in the future. I wanted to see what other important comments would come on that page. But suddenly, you accepted it, which was surprising to me. Later, when CNMall41 tagged the page for notability and unreliable sources, I checked some of the AfC pages you accepted and realized that, like me, you are also new to Wikipedia, so I ignored it. SachinSwami (talk) 09:25, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Because I still believe Nagamani Srinath is notable per WP:ANYBIO as she is a recipient of the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award. While I may not be a highly experienced editor, I am doing my best. Instead of making allegations, we should communicate with each other constructively and respectfully. But again Were you worried that if reviewers sent it back to Draft, it would be harder to bring it to Mainspace again? What does it mean?Afstromen (talk) 09:56, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Also please See this. Afstromen (talk) 09:58, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I completely agree with the tags placed by CNMall41 on the page. I also know that this page is notable, but receiving the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award and having sources for it is not sufficient under WP:ANYBIO. The person must have made significant contributions to their field, earning widespread recognition (e.g., in arts, science, literature, sports, politics, etc.). This requires confirmation of their contributions through reliable and independent secondary sources. Additionally, if a person is famous only for a single event (e.g., a viral video or a single news story), they do not qualify as notable under WP:ANYBIO unless their long-term contributions or impact are proven through sources (see WP:BLP1E).

  Also, I responded because you pinged me. I haven’t directly accused you of anything. Based on the photo added by Jodhpuri, I only mentioned that it “ I'm a bit confused" and asked about it while staying within WP:AfD rules. If my question has hurt your feelings, I apologize.-SachinSwami (talk) 10:59, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  No need to apologise, but please take care of this. If you are unsure or confused about any of my actions, feel free to ask me anytime. However, I kindly request that no direct or indirect allegations should be made without reason.Afstromen (talk) 12:06, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  yes. this picture was captured by me. Jodhpuri (talk) 18:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This thread is distracting from the notability discussion. As far as Nagamani Srinath, I went ahead and sent that to AfD here as I still have concerns and notability is not inherent simply for winning an award. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:31, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -The sources in it are not reliable, and the award is also not credible. Importantly, according to the comment above, the person who created the page has admitted to taking the photo themselves. There may also be a possibility of a conflict of interest (COI).- SachinSwami (talk) 22:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The person who created the page may have a conflict of interest, and the subject is not notable. Agnieszka653 (talk) 12:17, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore to draft as a WP:ATD. It is possible that sources before death exist and have just not been found. I would not rule out the opportunity to do so. BD2412 T 20:21, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there consensus for an ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 02:46, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I am extremely confused by the attitudes in this discussion towards obituaries. I think some participants may be confused about the distinction between death notices, which are typically short announcements or paid advertisements submitted by family members, and staff-written obituaries. A proper staff-written obituary in a reliable source is absolutely a GNG-qualifying source, and there is no requirement that we find coverage from prior to his death. See WP:Obituaries as sources. The obituaries in the Hindustan Times, ThePrint and The Indian Express are all bylined articles in reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the subject, and I do not see any reason why they would not count towards GNG. MCE89 (talk) 07:43, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Try not to throw slight at voters in AfDs. Also, you are citing an essay, not a guideline or policy. Even if it were a guideline or policy, it still says "usually notable," not is notable. Fact of the matter is that someone worthy of notice (which is part of a guideline, not an essay) would be covered outside of the obituary. Sorry, but having press write about you around the same time to honor your life is not the same as the press writing about you for what you are accomplishing in life. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:36, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies if you interpreted that as a slight, that was not my intention. You are correct that WP:Obituaries as sources is an essay, but what guideline or policy are you relying on for saying that obituaries are not GNG-qualifying sources? Obituaries are very frequently used as evidence of notability. In fact I would regard them as quite high-quality sources for biographies, since they provide a general overview of what someone has accomplished during their life rather than forcing us to piece things together from bits and pieces of coverage. I'm not seeing any policy basis for discounting obituaries as sources. MCE89 (talk) 22:41, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:N, the main notability guideline, and the discussions associated with that guideline. The fact there is nothing saying the "don't" establish notability does not mean they do. I don't need to prove a negative.--CNMall41 (talk) 22:55, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:N says that someone is notable if they have been the subject of multiple pieces of significant coverage in sources that are reliable and independent of the subject. These obituaries appear to meet all of those criteria. I’m not asking you to prove a negative, I’m asking you why obituaries should be held to a different and higher standard. And the discussion you are citing is an informal talk page discussion from 16 years ago where several participants made exactly the same distinction I’m making here - a paid death notice in the classifieds section is not useful for establishing notability, but a staff-written obituary is. MCE89 (talk) 23:18, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If they were notable before their death, it would have been documented in significant coverage. It would be the same as if someone received a lot of press around a single event (see WP:ONEEVENT). An obituary is an indicator that the person is notable, but having several obituaries in reliable sources which are pretty much churnalism would not be considered significant coverage.--CNMall41 (talk) 23:37, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree and leave it there. I agree that obituary coverage can fall into WP:ONEEVENT territory when it’s focused on the manner or circumstances of death (which is why we have guidelines like WP:VICTIM), but retrospective coverage on someone’s life and accomplishments that happens to be published upon their death is in my view a perfectly good GNG-qualifying source as long as it otherwise meets the WP:SIRS criteria. We’d have a lot of historical biographies that would need to be deleted if there was actually a requirement to find SIGCOV from during the subject’s life. And I don’t really see why we would disqualify these articles as churnalism given that they are bylined articles in reliable sources. MCE89 (talk) 11:53, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: MCE89 is correct, independent obituaries long enough for SIGCOV count towards GNG. The obits in the Hindustan Times, ThePrint and The Indian Express are clearly enough for GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 11:59, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, I would disagree. There seems to be discussions with this disagreement as well but nothing showing consensus that they do. Sorry, but having sources published about your life at the time of your death may indicate notability, but if you were notable when you were alive there would already be coverage. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:04, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please point to any guideline or policy that explicitly states that independently written obituaries cannot count towards GNG like any other piece of independent SIGCOV? Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 16:14, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have pointed to discussions on people disagreeing about it, just like we are here. I think a RSN discussion would be warranted and will open one in the next day. Would be good to get something for this and future AfDs. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:27, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if RSN is the right noticeboard for this? RSN is for reliability, not notablity. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 01:39, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. Sometimes my fingers have a mind of their own when my brain is in a fog (as it was earlier). Thanks for pointing it out. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:26, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Shah Israil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

This article fails to meet the notability guidelines as outlined in WP:N. The subject is not the focus of any significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The few mentions that do exist are passing and do not provide the depth of material necessary to support a standalone article. Most of the sources cited are either not about the subject or use it only as a brief example without substantial analysis or dedicated discussion. Given the lack of notability and meaningful coverage, the article does not justify its own space. Deletion or merging into a broader, more relevant topic (if applicable) would be more appropriate. Retaining it in its current state risks violating Wikipedia’s standards. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 23, Bangladesh, India and Islam. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Jaunpurzada (talk) 18:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - both the context and sourcing doesn't explain why he's notable. Where are the reviews of his works? Where are the compendiums or other collections? Bearian (talk) 01:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Sylhetis#Other languages. The deepest source is a single paragraph, half of which is about who he was descended from, about his uncle, and about one of his sons. The remainder is just two sentences: "[Syed Israil] was a sufi saint well known for his high proficiency in Arabic and Persian. He was also known as the Malek-ul-Ulama, well-versed in both Arabic and Persian: he wrote Madanul Fauaed in Persian in 914 Hijri." The other sources manage to cover the same ground in one sentence each. Because of the absence of significant coverage, this shouldn't be a stand alone article. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not sure why this dropped off the log, primarily procedural relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:26, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - only gets a passing mention in Banglapedia, the comprehensive national encyclopaedia.

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

• 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]