Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

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

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

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

Purge page cache watch

India

[edit]

List of Hindustani Muslim Heroes

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

Contested draft, not a neutral title, and entirely unsourced. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surjan Singh Jolly

Bablu Mahato

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

Clearly, it fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Simply being a member of a notable person's family does not automatically make an individual notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Also, A draft article about the subject already exists, which has been rejected multiple times by reviewers. However, the creator bypassed the process by changing the name and directly creating the article in the mainspace. Baqi:) (talk) 15:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Last One (film)

[edit]
The Last One (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)

WP:TOOEARLY. Draftify. This article looks like a PR work for Lokesh Kumar if anything. No indication that the film started filming or is going to release anytime soon. The director's page mentions that this film is in preproduction. DareshMohan (talk) 07:30, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vanvaas

[edit]
Vanvaas (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)

Upcoming film with no independent or secondary sources. Draftified to allow for more development but immediately restored to mainspace. All the sources are sponsored content or press releases. bonadea contributions talk 07:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, both sources are in the article (more than once I think — there's a lot of duplicate sources in there, and a lot of disruptive refbombing with more and more copies of the same crap advertorials) and they are worse than useless. Unless there are independent sources there shouldn't be an article. --bonadea contributions talk 16:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karma - When Destiny Strikes Back

[edit]
Karma - When Destiny Strikes Back (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 sources meeting WP:SIGCOV or even minimally satisfying WP:NFSOURCES have been found, fails WP:GNG. The provided sources offer only trivial mentions of the movie. — MimsMENTOR talk 15:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mahesh Kothe

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

The subject has only held non-notable positions, such the mayor and corporator of a small city. A BEFORE search returns results related to election preparations, which are routine and lack significant independent coverage. The article fails to meet WP:GNG as well as WP:POLITICIAN. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 10:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The other people who hold the notable position only as mayor & still have a Wikipedia are as follows:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malti_Rai
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priya_Rajan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadwal_Vijayalakshmi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pramila_Pandey
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firhad_Hakim
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinod_Agarwal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junaid_Azim_Mattu
The person is question - Shri Mahesh Kothe, apart from being a mayor has also initiated one of most important project that is Solapur IT park.
Read more about it at - https://www.thebridgechronicle.com/news/maharashtra/solapur-get-it-park-5000-jobs-expected-29124 Mohit Gandmal (talk) 11:29, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS does not equal "notable". And please stop repeating yourself, we saw your comment the first time. Sumanuil. (talk to me) 05:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Does not satisfy - WP:JUSTAPOLICY or WP:JUSTA or WP:VAGUEWAVE or WP:VAGUEWAVES - deletion discussions are not "votes". They are discussions with the goal of determining consensus. Rather than merely writing "Original research", or "Does not meet WP:Verifiability", consider writing a more detailed summary, e.g. "Original research: the main claim of subject's notability ('Future Nobel Prize') is unattributed speculation" or "Does not meet WP:Verifiability – only sources cited are blogs and chat forum posts". Providing specific reasons why the subject may be original research or improperly sourced gives other editors an opportunity to supply sources that better underpin the claims made in the article. Mohit Gandmal (talk) 06:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Based on the references reviewed, the subject currently qualifies as a local political figure, which does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for politicians (WP:NPOL). The key points are as follows:

1. Local Leadership: The individual has not demonstrated a broad impact or influence beyond local politics, which is a prerequisite for meeting Wikipedia’s specific notability guidelines for politicians.

2. 2024 Maharashtra Assembly Elections: The subject participated in the ongoing elections, but the results are yet to be announced. If the individual wins and achieves significant influence or recognition, they might become notable under Wikipedia’s guidelines.

3. General Notability Criteria (WP:GNG): The subject does not currently meet Wikipedia's general notability requirements, which typically involve substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources.

Thus, unless the election results or future accomplishments establish broader significance, the subject does not currently qualify for a Wikipedia entry. Baqi:) (talk) 09:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muthappan Kavu

[edit]
Muthappan Kavu (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 sources for this village itself since 2009, possibly needs a rename if not a delete? I can find lots of references to the festival and to Muthappan, but the only one I can find for this village in particular is this wiki article. Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, or possibly re-write. No evidence of notability. I have found a few sources referencing a temple of this name, but not a village. I can't even find anything with this name, let along a village, located on Google Maps, Bing Maps, or Apple Maps. I was able to find a temple with the name "Muthappan Kavu" on OpenStreetMaps, but not a village. Whoever created this article may have been talking about the Muthappan Kavu temple. A re-write or recreation of the article about the temple of the same name might be a possible alternative to deletion, but the temple is of questionable notability, too. GranCavallo (talk) 15:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or redirect to Muthappan. All signs point to: Muthappan Kavu is not a village. At first I was going to suggest redirecting to Memunda, since the article about Memunda already mentions Muthappan Kavu as a local "religious attraction". But as it turns out, in Google Maps you can find multiple places of worship with Muthappan Kavu in the name across multiple locations, and this article in The Hindu uses it is a generic term. There is, however, a Muthappan Kavu Road (not notable). Cielquiparle (talk) 05:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails WP:GNG, I did an extensive check when trying to find sources for this in English and Malayalam and couldn't, only things like this. Coeusin (talk) 06:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

S. V. S. Rama Rao

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

Unsourced since January 2009. The only source I can find for him - at least in english sources - is IMDb, which is not considered RS on its own. Smallangryplanet (talk) 10:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shalabam

[edit]
Shalabam (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:NFILM. No reliable reviews from Rediff.com and Sify.com [1]. The only 2 reliable sources are passing mentions. DareshMohan (talk) 06:00, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reema Debnath

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Reema Debnath (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. She has not played a leading role in any film either. There's no significant coverage about her in the sources and in WP:BRFORE search. Google news also shows 0 coverage about this individual. Nxcrypto Message 12:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. One supporting role in major(ish) film isn't enough to satisfy WP:NACTOR.
P.S. What is WP:BRFORE? I'm new in AfD, I mostly took part in counterpart project in Polish Wikipedia. OK, I think you meant WP:BEFORE :) Tupungato (talk) 12:35, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mayur Chauhan

[edit]
Mayur Chauhan (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 was twice declined in AfC and also fails NACTOR, as the subject has not had significant roles in notable films or shows. There is no significant coverage in reliable, independent sources apart from the WP:OR added by User:Saurang Vara who denies any COI despite being familiar with the subject's personal information. The subject's role in Chhello Divas does not appear to be significant and none of the other films have substantial content to be considered when evaluating Mayur Chauhan according to NACTOR. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you say his 3 roles in productions that have a page on this WP are not significant? And why should Karsandas Pay & Use be considered non-notable? I found some coverage about Saiyar Mori Re too. He seems to meet WP:NACTOR, -Mushy Yank. 13:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The mentioned films do not meet WP:NFOE/ WP:NFILM. Karsandas Pay & Use has two reviews, one from TOI with an unknown critic and another from an unknown website. Saiyar Mori Re has no reception section and Samandar (film) has two local reviews! From a WP:BEFORE search, none of these films have been distributed outside Gujarat. Just because these films have articles on Wikipedia does not mean they are notable in the first place to be used as evaluation criteria for Mayur Chauhan. Either way, there is zero coverage of the subject in reliable independent sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If a critic writes for a national publication such as Times of India he is considered nationally known as per discussions at WP:NFILM Atlantic306 (talk) 01:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Discusisons on What is a "nationally-known critic"? and "Nationally-known critic" as it relates to films of India aren't closed and there is no consensus either. Let me know if I have missed any archived discussions. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Azaad (2025 film)

[edit]
Azaad (2025 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage (SIGCOV) has been found. The film is set to be released next year, so there are no reviews available, failing to meet the criteria of WP:NFILM. GrabUp - Talk 07:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rmr. Ragulvarma

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

I couldn't find any information about this individual through Google searches, which makes me inclined towards this being a hoax. None of the references cited in the article appear to mention the person, and the content seems to be copied from the article on R. S. Munirathinam. Since the article was accepted via AfC, initiating a deletion discussion might be the most appropriate action. Hitro talk 07:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/RAGULVARMA PRABHU/Archive, Draft:RAGULVARMA PRABHU, DEEPA RAGULVARMA, Draft:DEEPA RAGULVARMA, PMK RAGULVARMA, Draft:RAGULVARMA PMK, User:RMR2004/sandbox and Draft:RAGULVARMA RMR. Falls well within CSD criteria of A7, G3 and A10, or G5 if anyone fancies reopening the SPI. Wikishovel (talk) 13:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A complete mess aside from the issues mentioned above. Procyon117 (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IForIndia

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

Notability-tagged for 11 years. Fails WP:10YT and WP:NORG. Didn't get off the ground insofar as the website is dead and the Facebook page was last updated in 2019. Geschichte (talk) 22:27, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. -Samoht27 (talk) 17:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saudamini Mishra

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

Article lacking WP:GNG and WP:BIO . Nxcrypto Message 17:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.business-standard.com/content/specials/beauty-and-brains-as-never-seen-before-in-the-genius-of-the-bestselling-autho r-and-artist-saudamini-mishra-aka-dhi-who-has-mastered-her-art-and-the-selling-of-it-to-change-lives-121030901304_1.html and https://www.business-standard.com/content/specials/saudamini-mishra-changing-lives-with-the-most-intellectual-stories-1201118011 79_1.html and https://www.indiatoday.in/impact-feature/story/author-saudamini-mishra-releases-her-fifth-bestselling-book-dhi-s-law-of-nine-archety pes-of-dhi-s-transformation-series-1985264-2022-08-08 and https://thedailyguardian.com/i-wanted-lives-to-be-changed-saudamini/ . 3 sourcs is enough for notability.Stromeee (talk) 17:31, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of your sources don't work (linking errors). You might need to fix them. Procyon117 (talk) 14:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign relations of the Magadhan Empire

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

A mess of WP:SYNTH connecting disparate incidents across centuries. The subject topic itself ("Foreign relations of the Magadhan Empire") has received no significant coverage in reliable sources. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:11, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep has proper sources backing everything up.
JingJongPascal (talk) 15:26, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Edasf«Talk» 15:56, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Not covered as a distinct topic in sources. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:10, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Principality of Pataliputra

[edit]
Principality of Pataliputra (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)

"Principality of Pataliputra" is an unsourced term and the content of this article is about the city for which we already have an excellent article Pataliputra. This article appears to be a POV fork of that article, primarily designed to push the idea of a continuity between mythology (the Magadha kingdoms described in Hindu mythological texts) and history (the Mauryas) RegentsPark (comment) 16:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RegentsPark I am unable to understand wha is your argument of of Mythological Hindu Magadha Kingdom and Mauryas since this article is related to none of them its about a polity that existed after fall of Kanvas and until rise of Guptas. Edasf«Talk» 13:42, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, all your argumetns are wrong
    • The article is not about the city
    • The article is not about any mythological kingdom
    • The article is not a POV fork, as i took nothing from city article and it is not related to it.

JingJongPascal (talk) 17:00, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magadhan Empire

[edit]
Magadhan Empire (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)

Redundant POV fork created after merging content from Magadha, without any discussion or consensus, this article stayed as a redirect for over 18 years before too. Nxcrypto Message 11:33, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: The topic certainly has notability and large coverage in scholarly sources to have a separate article on it (see Scholar or Books). Scholars describe the entity that existed from Bimbisara till the Kanvas as the Magadhan Empire. The article was not forked per se; it is a new article mostly, as the content about later dynasties and the lead are new, while the content about the Haryankas were moved from Magadha to this article. Historians make a distinction between the Magadha and the Magadhan Empire as seperate polities, with the latter being founded by Bimbisara and the former being a Mahajanapada of the Vedic era, as well as region based in it. PadFoot (talk) 11:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - No scholar describes or conflates two different polities which existed in the same region with a break of at least 300 years between them as the "Magadhan Empire" . This article appears to be a pseudohistorical narrative created solely to promote nationalist POV. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ratnahastin, I, the creator, had not included the Guptas in this article, it was included without consensus by the nominator, it is clearly the nominator who is POV pushing. He has been edit warring for the inclusion of the Guptas into this article and created a GIF showing the two together. See revision history of the article itself. PadFoot (talk) 12:02, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ratnahastin, the Gupta mentions have been removed. PadFoot (talk) 12:29, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The article clearly has sources supporting it's legitimacy and is not a POV fork in anyway.
"Mahajanapada" clearly means a kingdom during the Vedic and post Vedic period, Magadhan Empire exceeds this period and hence should not BE merged within "Magadha" article. The article's header clearly has sources mentioning the dynasties which ruled the empire and hence justifying it's legitimacy. JingJongPascal (talk) 12:33, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JingJongPascal Read WP:POVFORK, It says "In contrast POV forks generally arise when contributors disagree about the content of an article or other page. Instead of resolving that disagreement by consensus, another version of the article (or another article on the same subject) is created to be developed according to a particular point of view." There was no consensus for creating this separate article. Creating it only for pushing a POV is not allowed. Nxcrypto Message 15:13, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no 'POV' here. The article is about the Imperial entity of Magadha.
But the 'Magadha' is the article about the Mahajanapada.
A Mahajanapada is a kingdom which existed in india during vedic period, and hence should/ does not extent much.
Other than that PadFoot has provivded source the 'empire' in the first Paragraph of the article only. JingJongPascal (talk) 15:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
POV Fork would be when he makes two articles about same things with minor differences on his POV.
This ISNT POV fork. JingJongPascal (talk) 15:18, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - As per Ratnahastin. This could be the definition of POV fork. There might be room for an article like Chinese Empire for India, but this isn't it. Coeusin (talk) 09:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How exactly is it a POV fork?
    There are clear sources indicating the legitimacy of the article. Seems pretty dubious to me , announcing it as a "POV fork"
    A POV fork means extracting a article and creating a new one similar to it .
    While this is of a different political entity.
    Magadha and Magadhan Empire are 2 different things.
    Magadha was a mahajanapada aswell as a region. JingJongPascal (talk) 12:54, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coeusin, Ratnahastin made the argument that no scholar includes Guptas in the Magadhan Empire, but there is no mention of the Guptas in the article at all now. Besides, did you look at Google scholar to see if historians talk about it? If you would've (which you presumably didn't), you would have noticed a very significant coverage of it by scholars. It is a mainstream topic in ancient Indian history. It is not a fork, it is a completely seperate article, I only moved some content about the early dynasties, the majority of the information including the lead, is completely new. The Magadha article is about the Mahajanapada which predated the empire, and the region that later went on to form the core of it. PadFoot (talk) 13:07, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PadFoot2008, the Magadha article is fine. That's where this content should end, also. Ratnahastin did not mention the Guptas in his message and his point still stands. @JingJongPascal, it is a POV Fork between the already existing articles for the separate Indian empires and this. I looked at your sources and even them aren't categorical about the existence of a Magadhan Empire; instead, this is a term just being used to refer to the various polities in this period of Indian history, centered around what was the historic Magadha kingdom. This article is pushing an interpretation of unbroken continuity amongst these various kingdoms. Coeusin (talk) 13:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coeusin, Ratnahastin did not mention the Guptas? You seem to completely miss his point. He says here: No scholar describes or conflates two different polities which existed in the same region with a break of at least 300 years between them as the "Magadhan Empire" The two polities he mentions which have a gap of 300 years between them are the first Magadhan Empire and the second Magadhan Empire (Guptas). PadFoot (talk) 13:19, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PadFoot2008, and between the Haryankas and the Kanvas there is a gap of 340 years. Doesn't the point still stand? Coeusin (talk) 13:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coeusin, So the opinion of scholars doesn't matter? Historians such as Sailendra Nath Sen, R.C. Majumdar, V.D. Mahajan all mention it in their works:
    • "Ancient Indian History and Civilization", Sailendra Nath Sen:

      Thus the foundation of the Magadhan empire laid by Bimbisara was now firmly established as a result of the subtle diplomacy of Ajatasatru. [...] Though the Sungas did not play any conspicuous part in Indian history they at least arrested the tide of foreign invasion and saved the Magadhan empire from disintegration.

    • "Ancient India", RC Majumdar:

      The Kanva dynasty, founded by Vasudeva, comprised only four kings, and ruled over the Magadhan empire for a period of 45 years. The fourth king Susarman was overthrown by the Andhras in or about 27 B. C.

    PadFoot (talk) 13:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PadFoot2008, of course it does! The fun thing about social sciences is how they are built, from disagreements between scholars and the constant income of new methods and evidence. Of course, sometimes new arguments come with political/economic/we motivation behind them, but that's just part of the game. Weber, 120 years ago, established how nothing that's written in the social sciences is fully objective, and that's fine. The sources you cite have biases, just as the ones I will cite now do. Let's first look at "The Oxford History of India" (1919), perhaps the first source that comes to mind when we think about Indian history. Its chapters are sorted in the following manner:
    • Book I: Ancient India
      • Prehistoric India
      • Literature...
      • The pre-Maurya States
    • Book II: Hindu India from the beginning of the Maurya Dynasty in 322 B.C. to the 7th century A.C.
      • Chandragupta Maurya, the first historical emperor of India...
    But let's look at another, more recent, source. "Main trends in the historiography of the early Maurya Empire since independence", by Shankar Goyal (1995). In it, though he does use the term Magadhan Empire to talk about the Mauryan dynasty, he also quotes the following from Romila Thapar about the Mauryas and Magadhan:

    • The Mauryan state was an empire to the extent that it did control a large territory with culturally differentiated peoples and its nucleus, the state of Magadha, was enriched by the flow of revenue and resources from other regions.

    Afterwards, he discusses another trend in the literature in the following manner:

    • On certain points Bongard-Levin's observations are difficult to be accepted. For example, his assumption that slavery was widespread in Magadha and the neighbouring areas whereas in some of the more outlying regions, the tribal system still prevailed (p. 176), is difficult to be conceded.

    In conclusion, there may as well be many other works in the historiography where the various pre-Maurya dynasties and the Maurya, mostly centered around Pataliputra, are grouped together as Magadhan Empires (or even Empire), but that is a point of view in academia, far from unanymous and likely fringe. Far more common seems to be the use of Magadha simply as the geographical region centered around Pataliputra, the ancient imperial capital. The Latin, Byzantine and Ottoman Empires all had Constantinople as their capital, but were they continuations of the same entity? The various rulers of the Magadhan states also didn't share a common religion. Cheers, Coeusin (talk) 15:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coeusin, A common religion? A religion doesn't matter in the slightest here. We do not talk of capitals here at all. In fact, the Magadhan Empire didn't have a single capital throughout its existence, similar to many other historical entities. Capitals too do not matter at all. The Magadhan Empire had a clear continuity and was a single unbroken continuously existing polity. The Sisunagas overthrew the Haryankas in a rebellion. The Nandas murdered the last Sisunaga. The Mauryas again overthrew the last Nanda in a rebellion. The Śungas assasinated the last Maurya. The Kanvas assasinated the last Śunga. There is a clear continuity here and the existence of a singular polity where dynasties follow in quick succession. They didn't 'conquer' each other. The Ottoman Empire existed side by side the Byzantine Empire and the former ended up conquering the latter. We don't have a continuity or a single polity. Lastly, there are simply numerous sources that assert its existence. Just look at Google Scholar. It is not in the slightest a fringe topic. PadFoot (talk) 15:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also @Coeusin, the 1919 source not mentioning Magadhan Empire does not constitute an argument against it. A source not mentioning it doesn't mean that it presents an argument against it. No scholar says that "Magadhan Empire" is biased topic. PadFoot (talk) 16:02, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not the lack of a mention that is the main point, rather the treatment of Chandragupta as the first Emperor. Before then, V. A. Smith quite emphatically treats the states as kingdoms, which is a big distinction. Coeusin (talk) 16:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PadFoot2008, seeing as I am almost as far away geographically and spiritually from the Eastern religions and their place of birth as possible, I do not see what I could possibly have at stake here. Alas; the fact that the other dynasties didn't come to Pataliputra as conquerors doesn't really mean much - take, for instance, the times when kingdoms absorved other kingdoms through marriage in Europe. Charles the Bold's death meant the end of Burgundy, though the palace and court in Dijon remained.
    If we do not talk of capitals here, we should, for that is the main (and perhaps only) link between all the various dynasties mentioned in the article. Finally, the quantity of mentions in Google Scholar do not matter as much as they usually would; the term seems often to be used to refer only to the Mauryas (as it was during the time of the Mauryas), as in the example I cited above, or referring to the geographical region, centered around the ancient kingdom's core lands. Ideally, we should be able to find a paper analysing these as historical currents, but so far I've had no luck. Regards, Coeusin (talk) 16:06, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coeusin Apologies for accusing you of bias. It doesn't appear to me that you have any bias at all. It seems to me that you are a good faith editor. But even then, do you not see the continuity as I described above? Why should you think that a single polity cannot have more than one ruling family?. See Duchy of Moscow, Kingdom of France, Kingdom of England and countless other entities, all these had multiple dynasties. Certainly, you would not think that their capital alone makes them a single entity? PadFoot (talk) 16:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coeusin? PadFoot (talk) 16:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry @PadFoot2008, I have a paper due tomorrow lol. Yes, states with various ruling families can be a single polity, just as they can not be! Also, I thought all the dynasties the article named shared Pataliputra as a capital, was this not the case? Thanks, Coeusin (talk) 21:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry for disturbing you then. Feel free to respond at a later time. They did share a common capital. And I showed you the unbroken continuity above as well. Scholars for this reason refer to the 544 to 28 BC polities as the First Magadhan Empire while the Guptas were referred to as the Second Magadhan Empire. PadFoot (talk) 04:12, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The first line of the article has a source clearly stating that ....
    https://books.google.co.in/books?id=Oi7lzN6-W5MC&redir_esc=y
    Pg - 28 JingJongPascal (talk) 13:21, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you quote it for me? Thanks! Coeusin (talk) 13:23, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But yeah, adding the Guptas here would be particularly bad. Look how silly it looks in the Indian Empire disambig. Coeusin (talk) 13:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment TL;DR this article is a mess of unbalanced source misrepresentation and WP:SYNTHESIS which fundamentally misunderstands academic historiography, but it still retains a smidgen of potential. Here's why:
    • Yes, Magadha was often a nucleus of the states/dynasties mentioned, who for centuries tended to have their capital at Pataliputra. Thus, they can all be termed "Magadhan" empires. However, this article's construction of a single continuous "Magadhan Empire" that lasted from the sixth century to the first century is unfounded in historical thought. The dynasties it claims to comprise were distinct and presenting them as chronologically contiguous does push a certain POV.
    • Here, then, is what I would propose. This article should be renamed to "Magadhan polities" or similar—certainly it should not be in the singular. Most of the article should be cut so that it employs summary style to discuss all the polities it covers, not the overwhelming bias towards Maurya that we currently see. The frankly-pitiful sub-articles such as Foreign relations of Magadha should be deleted (I have now nominated it).
  • In the end, what would be achieved is a really quite encyclopedic summary of the "Magadhan polities" which details their evolution and differences. So if you wnt to quantify that into a !vote, it would be to keep with renaming and complete reorganisation, but honestly probably better to delete per WP:TNT. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "combining different dynasties", An Empire and Dynasty are different things. Serveral dynasties can rule a single political entity.
    PadFoot has clearly mentioned sources above by scholars stating it as the Magadhan Empire. JingJongPascal (talk) 13:59, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My above comment clearly explains why I believe that is misinterpretation of the sources. A productive response would engage with my comment, not duplicate PadFoot2008's reasoning. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I will go with deleting this article. The Magadha Empire page is not really necessary, as the information about the monarchs of Magadha is already covered in the List of monarchs of Magadha. The details about the various dynasties and rulers of Magadha can be effectively presented in that list, rendering a separate page for the "Magadha Empire" is redundant. It might be more efficient to focus on consolidating the information in the list rather than creating an additional, separate page and this might be Fork too, Although this is just my opinion, correct me if I am wrong here.

Malik-Al-Hind (talk) 10:35, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nindu Noorella Savaasam

[edit]
Nindu Noorella Savaasam (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 significant coverage in reliable sources. First two sources are about the remake and I can find no significant coverage to establish notability for the original here. Creation by UPE and redirect edit warred by IP so I would not recommend a redirect as an ATD unless it can be fully protected to avoid disruption. CNMall41 (talk) 22:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

War 2 (2025 film)

[edit]
War 2 (2025 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Moved to draft based on AfD discussion. Multiple attempts at recreation since that time with several of them being moved back to draft space. Now another SPA creating it in mainspace. Nothing notable about the production and not scheduled for release until a year from now. References are mainly announcements, but again, nothing notable about the production so falls under WP:TOOSOON. Recommend delete and protecting the title at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 22:00, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It has been disruptive and continues to be. The drafts need nuked and title protected. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Utkarsh Gupta

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

Still fails WP:NACTOR, so fails WP:GNG. One ref, questionable, was added after the previous AFC decline, and it isn't WP:SIRS. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source 1 and 2 are not independent, source 3 has mention about subject quitting mtv show, source 4 and 6 are unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES and Source 5 is passing mention about the subject about being first choice for the show. RangersRus (talk) 20:47, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How's source 2 not independent in entertainment category? Reminder, it's ruled out as not entirely independent in politics because of it's Political Alignment with the current indian regime.[1] Source 2 isn't the passing mention as it covers the subject who's quitting the show also source 5 covers two actors who were competing for some film role, the subject is among them, how's that the passing mention? (Reminder: Article titles usually tell readers what/who the article is going to cover/who's the subject). source 4 and 6 which are from the same website are indeed ruled as questionable in most cases but looking at it's discussion here, you have to choose what to source as it's still trusted by majority, also we are required to read any questionable context to see whether there's any sign of WP:COI, these articles (4&6) which are said to be of 2015 have some quality and reliable information in them plus less or no promotion. I still think the article should be kept. ANUwrites 12:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source 4 and 6 are unreliable for all reasons and that is why by consensus it was listed under unreliable Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Generally_used_sources. You can discuss about the source on WP:ICTFSOURCES talk page. When I mentioned about source 2 not independent means that the article is not independent of the claims (interview) made by the subject himself. Sources are recommended to be secondary independent. Source 5 is just passing mention and nothing significant that is needed to pass notability. RangersRus (talk) 13:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. A WP:NACTOR pass with at least 2 lead/main cast roles (ergo significant) in notable productions; existing sources (some presented here) allow to verify it. Mushy Yank (talk) 23:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance and Maharashtra. Mushy Yank (talk) 23:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source Analysis. Note that in show "Kaisi yeh yaariaan" the subject was not a lead but played the character of best friend of the main lead.
  • Source 1 writes about the subject quitting the show by sharing subject's Twitter message.
  • Source 2 is unreliable WP:IBTIMES
  • Source 3 is promotion and advertising the subject by sharing his Instagram.
  • Source 4 is passing mention.
  • Source 5 is passing mention about the subject being one of the contestant on the MTV Splitsvilla Season 8
  • Source 6 is unreliable WP:IBTIMES
  • Source 7 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
  • Source 8 has videos of different episodes of a show "Pyar Tune Kya Kiya" and the subject was in episode 1.
  • Source 9 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES.
  • Source 10 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES.
  • Source 11 is not independent with interview of the subject talking about his role in the upcoming TV show.
  • Source 12 is unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES
  • Source 13 is dead 404.
  • Source 14 is linked to jio cinema and suppose to show overview info on fuh se fantasy web series but quickly jumps to another screen but nothing significant on the subject.
  • Source 15 does not even have an entry about the subject. RangersRus (talk) 13:44, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Two or more roles with verification of those roles is not what WP:NACTOR means. Two or more roles give us the presumption that there is significant coverage (not just verification). The coverage here is all churnalism, unreliable, or WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yagyavalkya Institute of Technology

[edit]
Yagyavalkya Institute of 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)

Hardly to meet WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. Rajeev Gaur123 (talk) 01:53, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elephant football

[edit]
Elephant football (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:GNG. No secondary sources that shows WP:SIGCOV Demt1298 (talk) 20:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akshata Krishnamurthy

[edit]
Akshata Krishnamurthy (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)

Page does not seem to meet WP:NACADEMIC, reads more like a self-promotional page, and focuses more on what the subject's projects have achieved rather than the subject themselves. Tammy0507 (talk) 13:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Espresso Addict: And the article was created by a new editor as well. Your point being...? Tammy0507 (talk) 15:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's rare for new editors to find the deletion processes early in their career here. Espresso Addict (talk) 15:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe some of us are looking for a WP:CLEANSTART :) Tammy0507 (talk) 15:57, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apart from the Economic Times article (which is, if you read it, admits to being basically a reproduction of the subject's Instagram page), and to a certain extent the News18 report, I would cast serious doubts on whether the cited sources are actually reliable sources. Tammy0507 (talk) 10:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, I would like to remind editors what constitutes a reliable source and refer to WP:Reliable sources/News Organizations:

Human interest reporting is generally not as reliable as news reporting, and may not be subject to the same rigorous standards of fact-checking and accuracy (see Junk food news)

I do not see any source in this article and discussion that does not qualify as Human interest reporting. Tammy0507 (talk) 10:35, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The criteria above are sometimes summed up as an "Average Professor Test": When judged against the average impact of a researcher in a given field, does this researcher stand out as clearly more notable or more accomplished?

The criteria, in practice, vary greatly by field and are determined by precedent and consensus. Also, this guideline sets the bar fairly low, which is natural; to a degree, academics live in the public arena, trying to influence others with their ideas. It is natural that successful ones should be considered notable.

Other academic profiles for precedence: Anita Sengupta, Mark Adler, Farah Alibay, Bibhusita Das, Katherine Aaslestad --Shiv989 (talk) 17:55, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nirantara Ganesh

[edit]
Nirantara Ganesh (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 significant coverage of the subject in the cited sources and those I searched; hence, the subject fails to meet WP:GNG. Additionally, the subject is not an elected MLA or MP and therefore fails to meet WP:NPOL. GrabUp - Talk 14:50, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to Wikipedia and I don't have too much editing knowledge or anything. But I came across this article. This guy is a very famous social worker. Damn famous. I'm not sure whether this has to stay. But he's every famous. Wholeddadawgsout (talk) 16:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wholeddadawgsout: Being Damn famous does not inherently make a person notable per our guidelines. Please read WP:NOTABILITY. GrabUp - Talk 16:33, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback. However, I’d like to clarify a few points. The subject meets WP:GNG as there is significant coverage in reliable and independent mainstream sources. These sources discuss the subject in depth, not just passing mentions.
Additionally, while the subject is not an MLA or MP, notability on Wikipedia isn’t limited to holding public office. The article doesn’t contain any promotional content or unverifiable claims; it simply presents factual information based on reliable sources.
I believe the page meets Wikipedia’s guidelines and provides valuable information. I’d appreciate reconsidering the deletion Anandrajkumar0000 (talk) 16:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Anandrajkumar0000: Please provide those significant coverages here so others can evaluate them. GrabUp - Talk 16:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete pet WP:MILL - every three weeks, I served two 12- hour shifts as an EMT and also ran for village trustee, in beautiful New Paltz, New York. That doesn’t make me notable, and neither is this doctor/political party jumper/ social worker / damn famous guy notable. Bearian (talk) 04:34, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:47, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing about this guy is notable in any way. Only notable thing (at a stretch) is his relative. Procyon117 (talk) 16:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheema Y

[edit]
Cheema Y (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)

Likely to fail WP:NMUSIC KH-1 (talk) 06:03, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

any reasons to delete it ?
i can show you wikipedia pages that have no reference at all that people are not even famous.
but rightnow in north india this singer trending on number one.
give reasons to delete it mr.editor.
thanks. 2001:56B:3FFA:2FFE:C955:65B4:E1FE:305F (talk) 10:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please list any pages that don't have sourcing or unfamous people, that's also meaning they should at least be tagged for notability, perhaps deleted. Thank you for your help. Oaktree b (talk) 15:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That response comes across as quite immature. Are you really suggesting using other articles as justification for keeping this one? That’s not how we determine whether an article should be deleted. This is Wikipedia, and popularity alone doesn’t equal notability. I suggest familiarizing yourself with Wikipedia's notability guidelines before making such arguments. — MimsMENTOR talk 08:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep
This musical artist is very popular in India. I have noticed a general trend over both wikipedia and wikidata, that artists who are popular in countries outside of the USA are often deleted due to not meeting "notability criteria" despite them often being in the top 10 of popular artists in their own country, especially for artists from India or Africa.
There are lots of articles on the internet showing his popularity from independent well respected sources e.g.
Please consider keeping this entry. Thank you. QWER9875 (talk) 10:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Article is dominated with references to music chat websites which I do not know their reliability status. Only three sources in the article are not music chat websites. This one here[26] is the only source that could count for notability but this unfortunately is not enough. The other two left, one is interview and the other advertorial. Mekomo (talk) 11:16, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Smells of promotion with the flowery language. I'm not sure he's gained much attention as there isn't much of anything in RS. He's briefly mentioned here [27], I can only find Times of India articles that are problematic for the usual reasons. Oaktree b (talk) 15:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Parents' Worship Day

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Parents' Worship Day (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)

Per WP:INHERITED, this subject has got little coverage only because of its creator Asaram. The coverage of this subject is nil since Asaram's own image is going through a deep crisis for many years. - Ratnahastin (talk) 12:52, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: Parents Worship Day is a widely celebrated festival in India. It is well recognized by government officials. As stated in the article: It is officially celebrated by the Chhattisgarh Govt in schools and colleges as ordered by the Chief Minister. State government led by the Bharatiya Janata Party made it an official celebration. In 2017 the District collector in Madhya Pradesh issued a notice for schools to celebrate it and so on. There are a lot of independent and reliable references which prove the validity of these statements. This article must not be nominated for discussion just because the image of the initiator i.e. Asaram Bapu is under crisis. Wikipedia is a platform that depends on facts and notability of an article and this festival is being celebrated since more than 10 years in India and it's a compulsory program to attend for thousands of school students all over India. SukritiVarma (talk) 09:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Parents Worship Day is day that's being celebrated officially by the government now. This celebration is compulsory in schools as is evident by these references: [2][3] There are lot more such references, I don't see any valid reason why this page was nominated for deletion, it must be retained. SushasiniGupta (talk) 03:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both of your sources are only saying that this was a government action. Not every day propagated by the government needs to have their own article. Same way we have no article on "Samvidhan Hatya Diwas".[28] CharlesWain (talk) 04:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Parents Worship Day is not just a government action, this is a festival that's quite widely accepted by the masses. Since this is a festival that celebrates emotional bond between parents and children, so people of all religion are accepting it. It cannot be compared with Samvidhan Hatya Diwas. Because this festival is celebrated by masses not only in India but in abroad as well.
1. Even Muslims are celebrating this day as Abba Ammi Ibadat Diwas [29]
2. Sanatan Dharam Sabha Celebrates “Matra Pitra Poojan Diwas” [30]
3. News coverage: More than 10,000 people celebrated this event in Kurla [31] SushasiniGupta (talk) 13:13, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. The existence of this article, at the present moment, tantamounts to WP:SOAP. CharlesWain (talk) 04:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - Both of the editors who voted for "keep" above are blatant WP:SPAs and have edited nothing outside this topic.[32][33] CharlesWain (talk) 04:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As per WP: Neutral Point of View - Articles with reliable sources must be retained, even if the subject is controversial. Decisions in Wikipedia's Articles for Deletion discussions are determined by the strength of arguments based on policies, such as WP:Notability, rather than the edit count of participants. My reasoning highlights the independent cultural significance of Parents Worship Day and its coverage in reliable sources, demonstrating that the topic's notability extends beyond its association with its creator. SushasiniGupta (talk) 13:21, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please don't use an AI platform to write AfD rationales, or copy basic AfD policies we should all already know. Nate • (chatter) 23:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Per nom. No SIGCOV or any long lasting effect. INHERITED is fulfilled. The keep !votes are misleading and do not bring up any credible argument based on our P&Gs. — Benison (Beni · talk) 09:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Parents Worship Day has become a cultural event observed by various schools and communities, reflecting its relevance beyond its initial introduction. The day promotes values of respect and gratitude toward parents, which hold significance in societal traditions. Multiple independent sources have documented its observance, indicating it has received attention outside of its originator’s influence. Removing the article would overlook an established practice that resonates with many individuals and groups. I'mAll4 Wiki (talk) 16:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep : Per WP:DLC dislike for the subject or Dislike of the creator should not be reason for over-zealous article deletion, the notability of the article should be independently assessed. The nominator of this deletion lists down very plainly their dislike for creator, without arguing on quality or notability of article itself.
If we can find multiple secondary sources WP:DIVERSE covering this event outside any reference to its creator, this article should not be deleted
WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE across years (even after presumed interest waning on creator) is another factor in favor of this article
  1. https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-jammu-redefines-the-day-as-mother-father-worship-day-2584739 authored by Ishfaq-ul-Hassan on DNA India
  2. https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/community/parents-worship-day-on-february-14-40462/ on The Tribune India
Nisingh.8 (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They merely noted the subject is controversial and has a shaky public image. Hardly anywhere near WP:IDLI and just stating a known fact. Nate • (chatter) 23:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @MrSchimpf - i was also merely stating that deletion nomination did not highlight anything apart from creator image and per Wikipedia:INHERITED if creator’s notability cannot be used to lend notability to article, vice-versa also may not apply Nisingh.8 (talk) 09:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your first source is at best a news release as it concerns celebration of this day by Satsang Prachar Sewa Mandal. Your second source does not even have author information and uses a byline, it's very clearly a press release per WP:NEWSORGINDIA. - Ratnahastin (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/times-of-india/
  2. ^ https://www.hindustantimes.com/ranchi/government-school-students-to-worship-parents-in-jharkhand/story-mBGxvrH4HW33cOOZarLSSL.html
  3. ^ https://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/madhya-pradesh-chhindwara-collector-asks-people-to-worship-their-parents-on-valentines-day/545893/

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 20:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to Asaram#Teachings and views, which is much clearer about the event than this collection of press releases barely holding this article together, and which has nothing at all (I can't even call it a false balance) from those who still wish to celebrate Valentine's Day and their opposition to this event. Nate • (chatter) 21:24, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    On what basis are you calling independent news coverages as press release?
    If people in India are celebrating Parents Worship Day and government is also making the celebration compulsory in schools, that itself proves how widely this is being adopted in India. It's okay that other people in Western countries or even in India prefer celebrating Valentine's Day but that doesn't mean you are going to delete this page.SushasiniGupta (talk) 16:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of the stories specifically say that very few actual people wanted to celebrate it and it was forced upon them as an administrative or government mandate rather than an organic celebration. One of the stories is literally a state education minister putting out PR for the holiday to cover up the subject's various public issues. There are no counter-sources about how others feel about a holiday being forced upon them when another holiday has existed for hundreds of years to celebrate, and the vast majority of sources here talk about veneration of parents, even if they do completely unforgivable things, over loving others. There's no balance here to be found, just blatant PR for an effort to force a holiday upon people. Nate • (chatter) 17:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    On what basis are you saying it's a forced one, there are lots of references where students became emotional and expressed gratitude for celebrating the unique bond that they have with parents.
    Here is the quote from this reference [34]: "We invited our parents to the school and offered them flowers, worshipped them and finally sought their blessings," said Nishant Mishra, a Class-V student
    "It was really a very touching moment for me. At least these children would learn how important parents are for them," Lipsa Parida, a mother of two boys.
    Since these are quotes, now don't tell me these 5th class kids and their parents are doing PR. they are expressing what they felt and this is covered in news.
    Even Muslims students were touched by this day, another quote[35] Aliya Pathan, a student, said, “In Islam, they say that jannat is beneath your parents’ feet and they should be treated with a lot of respect. So, we decided to celebrate Valentine’s Day by pledging to take care of our parents.” Umair Sheikh, another student, said, “Love comes in so many forms. SushasiniGupta (talk) 14:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Given the detailed history and widespread adoption of Parents' Worship Day across various Indian states and institutions, the topic demonstrates cultural significance and societal impact. The celebration has been officially recognized by state governments such as Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Gujarat, and has gained support from educational institutions, NGOs, and community organizations. Independent media coverage highlights its relevance as a family-centric alternative to Valentine's Day. These factors satisfy Wikipedia’s general notability guidelines, making it an important cultural phenomenon worth retaining as an article. Exposethefacts (talk) 02:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Gptzero result for this comment came to be 73% AI generated. Also real world notability=/= Wikipedia notability, you have to prove how this article satisfies Wikipedia guidelines and standards on that. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Replying after relisting) @Ratnahastin I was trying to broaden up on coverage and notability of event outside its creator, and while below is not comprehensive lists but could eaily find mentions on observance of this event/day at many other places below via simple search -
    Nisingh.8 (talk) 09:56, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If all you could find are some random no name schools celebrating this day, then I'm afraid you are only corroborating my point that real world notability=/=Wikipedia notability. - Ratnahastin (talk) 10:15, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For an article to be notable on Wikipedia, there should be reliable, independent sources, and there exists multiple such sources for Parents Worship Day page. Following are few of the reliable sources for your verification. FYI: These are from the most reliable news websites in India such as : BBC, Times of India etc.
    It's official: Chhattisgarh renames Valentines Day as 'Matru-Pitru Diwas'. [1]
    Parents Worship Day: After Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand To Implement Jailed Godman Asaram’s Advice [2][3]
    Chhattisgarh makes Parents Worship Day a compulsory observance in schools on February 14 [4]
    FYI: I hope you got a gist of how this is notable in terms of Wiki policies, please refer the article and go through all the 30+ references present there. This is a discussion not a list of references so I mentioned only 4. SushasiniGupta (talk) 14:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Real World notability and Wiki notability both criteria are met in this particular article since this festival is famous in real world and a lot of reliable ref links exist to suffice the notabilitySushasiniGupta (talk) 16:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Parents' Worship Day Wiki page is supported by independent, reliable and multiple reference links. This is a day that's celebrated across India since the theme has an emotional touch. That's the reason why even though the initiator Asaram Bapu's image is under question currently but this concept has been widely adopted even by government and general public. Just do a Google Search and see tons of references for the enormous acceptance and recognition of this festival.
Those trying to delete this article seem to be doing so just because of initiator's image as mentioned in the comment of the person who initiated the deletion process. But Wiki is not a place to target a page for deletion because the initiator is out of favor.
Let's say a person founded a company or was instrumental in initiating or promulgation of a concept like Tree Plantation Day etc. a concept that is getting wide recognition by public and founder was jailed later, would you delete the company's page as well? Wiki is not a place to target initiatives just because they are from someone whose actions you do not support. Seems an irrelevant discussion and people who saying delete are acting out of emotion not logic. Remember this festival is no longer only associated with its initiator Asaram Bapu, it's now a celebration across countless schools and colleges. Nandwanirajesh (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to repeat this one more time; there is a non-existent balance with this article where it talks only in glowing terms about the holiday, its inventor, and how it's being used as an alternative to V-Day and being forced upon others without any question or criticism. Local school newsletters are not only non-notable, but also non-neutral, and the fact it is being made compulsory to celebrate when V-Day is a completely voluntary holiday needs to be elaborated on, and at this point this feels like an article that never has any intentions about talking about it neutrally. Finally, stating the inventor has some controversial views is not the reason for deletion here and is supported by BLP and will not be removed. Nate • (chatter) 19:21, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shradha Sharma

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

This article fails WP:NBIO, most of the references are extremely poor or straight up paid articles about her company. [41][42] - Ratnahastin (talk) 15:54, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:14, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miss You (film)

[edit]
Miss You (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)

This is about an unreleased film which does not satisfy film notability. Unreleased films are only notable if production itself has received significant coverage by reliable sources. A review of the sources shows that they are all announcements or press releases about the film or its songs. The first five references, in four different media, are essentially identical, which is best explained that they are the same press releases to different media.

Reference Number Reference Comments Independent Significant Reliable Secondary
1 The Hindu States that movie will be filmed. No. 1 through 5 are the same, and so are a press release. Not for this purpose Yes Yes
2 cinemaexpress.com States that movie will be filmed. No. 1 through 5 are the same, and so are a press release. Not for this purpose Yes Yes
3 thesouthfirst.com States that movie will be filmed. No. 1 through 5 are the same, and so are a press release. Not for this purpose Yes Yes
4 www.business-standard.com States that movie will be filmed. No. 1 through 5 are the same, and so are a press release. Not for this purpose Yes Yes
5 The Hindu Same as 1 No. 1 through 5 are the same, and so are a press release. Not for this purpose Yes Yes
6 timesnownews.com States that movie will be filmed. Probably. Not for this purpose Yes Yes
7 Times of India Passing mention of a song. Maybe No. Passing mention. No Yes
8 cinemaexpress.com Press release about a song. No. No Yes Yes
9 cinemaexpress.com Another press release about a song. No. No Yes Yes
10 news18.com An announcement about the film. Probably. Not for this purpose. Yes Yes

There is also a draft; the draft and the article are by different authors. The information in this article and in the draft can be merged in the draft, and the draft can be submitted, with reviews and other quality sources, when the film has been released and reviewed. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:52, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:52, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because release is announced for late November, I would normally have suggested to keep this and I would have merged the draft into it .....but there are TWO drafts Draft:Miss You Movie (created yesterday, just before the article, same creator) and Draft:Miss You (film) by User:Gowthamaprabu (created 21. 10); the latter was declined by the nom. Read the following comment: "Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Miss You (film) instead.", said the nom of the present AfD when declining the page.....which, if I was the page creator, would make me think, the page discussed here is not concerned by deletion! Still as Gowthamaprabu's Draft was the first page to be created, I consider it should be the starting point so I suggest a merge of all three pages into Draft:Miss You (film). Premise is known, actors are notable, coverage for verification exists, so even if it's the other way around, I won't be shocked but declining the Draft and inviting its creator to expand a page and, an hour later or so, taking the said page to AfD is a bit confusing.Mushy Yank (talk) 22:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. Mushy Yank (talk) 22:54, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello @Robert McClenon and @Mushy Yank! Hope you're both doing well! I wanted to provide some context regarding the article Miss You (2024), which covers the upcoming film set for release at the end of November 2024. As mentioned transparently, I have been commissioned by the producers to edit and create content for this article, ensuring accurate representation of the movie. I’ve Confirmed that the official release date is November 29, 2024, though due to a lack of publicly available citations, I haven't specified the date in the article itself. I’ve included all available information with relevant citations, and I believe the content is accurate and complete as presented. If possible, I'd suggest we retain the article and continue to improve it together. We could even consider merging it with Draft: Miss You (Film) by User:Gowthamaprabu to consolidate information. Meena1998 (talk) 07:10, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Draft:Miss You (film) since the film's release is near, let's wait. Once it hits theaters, it is expected to get more coverage and critical reviews. You can then update the page and publish it through the AFC route. For now, let's merge its content into the declined draft:).Chanel Dsouza (talk) 13:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree to merge Miss You (film) article with my draft Draft:Miss You (film). Gowthamaprabu (talk) 03:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:55, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daveed (2025 film)

[edit]
Daveed (2025 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreleased film, nothing especially notable about the production, therefore does not meet WP:NFILM, specifically WP:NFF, as an as yet unreleased film. Should have remained in draft space but has been moved back to main space, so deletion is required. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 17:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And regarding the notbaility of prodcution, The film was distributed by Century Films which is the distributer of Malaikottai Vaaliban, Perumani and John Luther etc. These are the details I got from the producers social handles. Arjusreenivas (talk) 18:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Notability" would rather be established through sources independent of the subject. (Not saying that what you are saying is not true nor that it is not interesting) Mushy Yank (talk) 22:46, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Thank you for your Participation in this Discussion, Please Check sources, I think the article have more than enough sources. Arjusreenivas (talk) 03:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing about the production, as stated, is notable. Everything is very, very standard. WP:NFF is clear: 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. Basically, you should not be creating articles in main article space about the vast majority of films that have not yet released. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 10:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, This article covers a film that's set to release in the next two months. Regarding production details, I can only reference publicly available news articles and interviews. Given the popularity of this film in India, I believe many people here are already aware of its production background. I kindly request someone from India to assess the notability of this article, especially regarding its production and other key details.
I welcome everyone to expand the article and contribute with verified information. I’m also sharing data I’ve gathered from media sources to help make this a comprehensive and accurate article. Please feel free to edit for clarity, correct any English errors, and improve. Arjusreenivas (talk) 11:14, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Antony_Varghese#Films: listed there; given existing coverage, the fact that filming is wrapped, the cast, notable and details about productions are verifiable, I am not opposed to Keep if other users agree it can be kept (opposed to deletion, not necessary in the present case). Mushy Yank (talk) 22:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, Mushy Yank. Yes, I believe this article is relevant to keep on Wikipedia because the release date has been announced, and the film has already wrapped. Therefore, deletion would not be the right decision. Thank you for your comment. Arjusreenivas (talk) 03:13, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Redirect would be fine, until the film has released. I mean, draftifying would have worked, too, but... BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, The article meets 4 out of 5 of the WP:NFF production guidelines. Enough information is available to support article. Also it can be classified under the "2025 films, Upcoming films, Upcoming Malayalam-language films" category. Arjusreenivas (talk) 15:42, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What "5 production guidelines" are you talking about? There is nothing unclear about WP:NFF: films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 10:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Let me finish the sentence you're referring to, as it seems you might have missed it. The guideline states: "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." Out of the five guidelines of production: Development, Pre-production, Production, Post-production—four have been covered. The only stage not fully met is Distribution. That's why 4 out of 5 criteria for an unreleased film to qualify for an article have been fulfilled. — MimsMENTOR talk 21:51, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The film has successfully completed its production phase, and reliable sources confirm that it is currently in the post-production and marketing stages, with only the final release pending. The project meets 4 out of 5 of the WP:NFF production guidelines. Sufficient information is available to justify an independent article, and it can be classified under the "2025 films, Upcoming films, Upcoming Malayalam-language films" category.--— MimsMENTOR talk 07:35, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your input. I believe there are no notability issues with this article, so it should be retained. From my review, the movie is scheduled for release in two months, and it’s not from a new production or featuring unknown actors. Thank you for your contribution. Arjusreenivas (talk) 15:38, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Mushy Yank (talk) 22:52, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:07, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haryana Gana Parishad

[edit]
Haryana Gana Parishad (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 enough sources to show that this meets WP:NORG. PROD was contested. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pranav Adani

[edit]
Pranav Adani (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 individual. Sources are promotional and cited to WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Only known for being a relative of Gautam Adani. See WP:INHERITED. Ratnahastin (talk) 09:54, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Do we have a possible WP:ATD here? A redirect to Gautam Adani? Or would that be irrelevant to that article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Number Reference Comments Independent Significant Reliable Secondary
1 https://www.india.com/business/meet-man-who-studied-at-harvard-and-boston-works-closely-with-gautam-adani-he-is-adanis-7278041/ Promotional tone and emphasizes his "blood relation" to Gautam Adani, falls under NEWSORGINDIA. No Yes No Yes
2 https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/pranav-adani-powering-ahead-114111201488_1.html Promotional flattering puff piece from 2014 that falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. No Yes No Yes
3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMe6BgJCXfM DD footage of his speech at GIS 2023. Yes NA No No
4 https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-pranav-adani-one-of-the-heirs-to-india-s-leading-business-empire-he-is-gautam-adani-s-nephew-3111696 Appears to be a promotional press release like the business standard source above, falls under NEWSORGINDIA. No Yes No Yes
5 https://www.businesstoday.in/magazine/columns/story/indias-green-journey-why-the-country-must-tone-down-its-reliance-on-thermal-energy-according-to-pranav-adani-418968-2024-02-26 Probably the transcript of his speech at a summit,the source lists Pranav Adani as the author. No No No No
6 https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/article/3281554/meet-4-heirs-poised-inherit-gautam-adanis-us213-billion-empire-karan-jeet-pranav-and-sagar-company A few passages dedicated to him emphasizing his role as the inheritor of Adani's fortune. Yes No Yes Yes
7 https://www.financialexpress.com/life/lifestyle-meet-pranav-adani-the-lesser-known-nephew-of-gautam-adani-and-brother-of-karan-and-jeet-adani-know-about-his-career-education-and-more-3588785/ Indian outlet & promotional puff piece, has generic byline and falls under NEWSORGINDIA. No Yes No Yes
8 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-08-08/adani-group-says-it-can-revamp-dharavi-even-as-it-becomes-political-flash-point Only the second last paragraph covers him,while the last one is quoting him, the source only appears to state his relationship with regards to Adani group's efforts at slum rehabilitation. Yes No Yes Yes
9 https://www.rediff.com/money/report/pix-special-meet-the-young-man-behind-the-success-of-adani-group/20141113.htm Same article as the business standard source above. No Yes No Yes
10 https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/lucknow/pranav-adani-meets-yogi-adityanath-offers-to-invest-in-food-parks-power-7076516/ WP:ROUTINE coverage about him announcing investments in Uttar Pradesh Yes No No Yes
11 https://www.livemint.com/Companies/DqJuRxvZs9nLSrDnBnMZ4H/Adani-Enterprises-names-Pranav-Adani-as-additional-director.html WP:ROUTINE coverage & passing mention about being named as a director of an Adani subsidiary. Yes No Yes Yes
12 https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/business/business-news/gautam-adani-lesser-known-nephew-pranav-adani-adani-enterprises-md-know-everything-about-him/articleshow/113673383.cms Another puff piece in the same vein as all the previous articles. No Yes No Yes

- Ratnahastin (talk) 03:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As discussed on WP:NEWSORGINDIA, there is no indication of sponsored content, such as supplements, published by these media outlets. Additionally, there is no evidence of Brand Wire, Press Release News, Business Spotlight, Brand Post, or Impact Feature. It remains unclear why the nominator continues to consider the content as paid. Avishek Pilot (talk) 10:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I already addressed this. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personal opinions alone may not serve as a valid basis for arguments. The entire summary of the AFD seems to rely on personal thoughts without supporting or verifiable evidence to substantiate the concerns raised. Some comments made during the discussion seem aimed at challenging opposing point. As this is a collaborative discussion, it’s important to consider all perspectives and await the final decision. Avishek Pilot (talk) 11:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This does not address what I wrote there. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Per source analysis provided by the nominator, the subject appears to have only received coverage in paid advertorials while reliable and independent sources only offer rudimentary coverage, that too for being Adani's nephew. Nxcrypto Message 14:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Many sources are available, and as per WP:BASIC, established WP:GNG. Please see the coverage the rediff.com here, Indian Express here, Livemint here, Navbharat Times here. The arguments on WP:NEWSORGINDIA seem to center around the confusion of whether the content is paid or not. However, as per WP:NEWSORGINDIA, there is no indication of paid coverage, only a writing style often used in Indian media. Historically, Indian media uses a promotional tone to attract readers, this does not necessarily indicate paid coverage. If this standard were applied broadly, no Indian article would remain on Wikipedia, as the common issue would always be a promotional tone without evidence of paid coverage. Deleting an article based on such a premise does not align with WP:PURPOSE. Kevarove (talk) 18:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That rediff source is literally the same article & authored by the same guy as the Business Standard article that has been already addressed above. Indian Express & Livemint are merely routine news coverage about him investing in Uttar Pradesh and being named as a director of an Adani subsidiary. Navbharat article is an unreliable promotional puff piece. None of these sources address any of the concerns raised prior or fall out of the purview of WP:NEWSORGINDIA. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The source analysis is persuasive, far more so than any of the Keep analyses. Edwardx (talk) 19:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep- The source analysis by the nominator appears to be based on personal interpretations, as reflected in comments like 'promotional tone,' 'promotional press release,' 'probably the transcript,' 'Indian outlet,' and 'promotional puff piece.' These points lacking in dependability. Additionally, as WP:NEWSORGINDIA is under question. The subject is a well-known business entity, recognized in India and globally. The analysis by Kevarove Pass WP:SIGCOV. Wyzoqaku (talk) 20:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The words I have used are already used at WP:NEWSORGINDIA, there's no personal interpretation here. Your post is only reiterating comments by prior votes. - Ratnahastin (talk) 03:10, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: seems to have enough coverage for WP:GNG. Kevarove have added 4 new refs which are Pass WP:N. The sources has significantly provided coverage to this person. Bojawa (talk) 21:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator's source analysis and the absence of policy- or source-based keep !votes. I also disagree with the "no consensus" argument above. The history of socking/UPE here is very concerning. At risk of casting improper aspersions, I will note my lack of surprise at seeing that this AfD has attracted a large number of new or inexperienced editors. Toadspike [Talk] 08:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There is no evidence of meeting WP:GNG. ZDX (User) | (Contact) 12:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I said this after the second re-list nearly a week ago, and I still believe its true. There currently is no consensus in this discussion to delete the article. The source analysis by Ratnahastin has not made a significant change in consensus, and opinions remain fairly evenly divided (not that it's a vote). It's time to close this as no consensus.4meter4 (talk) 15:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Check the SPI. - Ratnahastin (talk) 15:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is concerning, but even absent the discounted commenters, I still don't think there is a clear consensus to delete.4meter4 (talk) 17:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given the CU's comment It seems improbable that half a dozen unrelated good-faith actors would show up to an AfD with a history of UPE while hopping across proxies. I would say Wikipedia:Open_proxies#Checkuser applies here. - We will have to discount everyone listed there. - Ratnahastin (talk) 17:20, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for filing that, Ratnahastin. 4meter4, I disagree. The !votes to keep have been entirely free of sourcing or policy-based arguments. And while I agree with your point about systemic bias to some extent, we won't improve the Indian media landscape with an AfD, and a member of the Adani family is the last person I'd consider oppressed by systemic bias. Toadspike [Talk] 17:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
a member of the Adani family is the last person I'd consider oppressed by systemic bias - Infact, they have thoroughly abused Wikipedia for self promotion. - Ratnahastin (talk) 17:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

[edit]

Files for deletion

[edit]

Category discussion debates

[edit]

Template discussion debates

[edit]

Redirects for deletion

[edit]

MFD discussion debates

[edit]

Other deletion discussions

[edit]
  1. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Its-official-Chhattisgarh-renames-V-Day-as-Matru-Pitru-Diwas/articleshow/46151391.cms
  2. ^ https://www.outlookindia.com/national/parents-worship-day-after-chhattisgarh-jharkhand-to-implement-jailed-godman-asar-news-305893
  3. ^ https://www.bbc.com/hindi/india-38956151
  4. ^ https://web.archive.org/web/20131018015852/http://www.merinews.com/article/chhattisgarh-makes-parents-worship-day-a-compulsory-observance-in-schools-on-february-14/15881586.shtml%26cp
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/India&oldid=1258994589"