Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

Shortcuts

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

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

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

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

Further information

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

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

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

Purge page cache

watch

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

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

India

Modhalum Kaadhalum

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

This is actually the third deletion discussion. Originally deleted under this discussion in early 2023 prior to being recreated under alternative name which was then a no consensus at this discussion. Out of the 21 references listed on the page this is the only reference that may be notable but I cannot read it so not sure. The rest fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA or are otherwise unreliable. Would recommend a redirect to the original program it is based on (Yeh Hai Mohabbatein). CNMall41 (talk) 03:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. CNMall41 (talk) 03:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Dewair (1606)

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

This article is a WP: REDUNDANTFORK from Mughal conquest of Mewar. There was no need to create this standalone article as the content is already present in the other article. Hence it should be deleted. Admantine123 (talk) 01:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and India. Admantine123 (talk) 01:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mughal–Rajput wars

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

This article is a poor WP:CONTENTFORK (WP:REDUNDANTFORK) from several articles like Rajput Rebellion (1708–1710), Rathore rebellion (1679–1707) and List of battles in Rajasthan. The individual topic like Battle of Khanwa has been stitched together to create an article suggesting that something like Mugal Rajput wars were a single homogeneous event spread over the different period of time. The individual topics are isolated events and a duplication from the List of battles in Rajasthan. So it should be deleted and content if anything that is here but not in List of battles in Rajasthan should be merged to latter. Admantine123 (talk) 01:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and India. Admantine123 (talk) 01:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sholai

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

Fails WP:NFO. Article was WP:DRAFTIFY'd yesterday but the creator immediately moved it back to mainspace. The creator is now blocked for disruptive editing elsewhere. RachelTensions (talk) 21:55, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Is this a school or a movie [1]... Regardless, this mess of an article isn't ready for mainspace and the sourcing is just not there. Oaktree b (talk) 23:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:22, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Article claims it was released two years ago, but all I can find about it online in English or Malayalam (ഷോലൈ) is the usual breathless WP:NEWSORGINDIA fluff about the poster release, the trailer release, etc, and not a single review. No obvious target for redirect or merge. Wikishovel (talk) 04:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 18

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

Unaccepted draft exists at Draft:Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 18 with several rejections, edits from multiple contributors and a longer history. 2000editor has ignored this and pushed something with less information at this point that is questionable if the pre-release publicity articles show enough to meet notability. The ideal solution would be to continue to work on the draft and get that accepted, but given this has been recreated by 2000editor several times, AFD is probably the best option to resolve this via consensus rather than one editor ignoring what others are respectfully working on. Ravensfire (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. Ravensfire (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An option could be to merge the contents of the draft and hist-merge the draft and consider it accepted. Not ideal, but by the time this gets close to closing the show will be close to broadcast and there should be plenty of material to show notability. I cannot accept anything where the work on the draft is not respected and included - that would be extremely disrepectful to those that have done things the correct way. Ravensfire (talk) 17:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. If you check the edit history of the draft, you'll see that the creator of this latest version has been removing other editors' useful contributions, in borderline vandalism. From that, and from this thread at their user talk, they seem to want full credit for the article, or something. In any case, the draft is nearly ready for publication. Wikishovel (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interestingly enough, they created the original draft on 9/17. Even with a histmerge, they would get credit for creating. Impatientence, some communication issues and here we are. Ravensfire (talk) 18:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom and fully protect Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) season 18 and Bigg Boss (Hindi season 18) and the draft should be moved to mainspace when it meets general notability. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 17:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Reiterating all the points listed above. The conduct is very concerning but better for ANI at this point. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thinking about an ANI post but for an IAR solution to this - merge the contents of this into the draft, histmerge with the draft, then accept the draft, and mark this AFD as moot with the draft accepted. Meets the goals of improving the encyclopedia, with the contents merged it's close to meeting GNG if not there and the disruption is stopped. With the histmerge, all of the contributions from before are noted and recognized. Thoughts? Ravensfire (talk) 18:34, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2000editor started an ANI post at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Creation_of_Bigg_Boss_18_article, I left this proposal there. Ravensfire (talk) 18:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I left a comment there. Seems to be an WP:IDHT or WP:CIR issue. Either way, it is becoming disruptive. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dinesh Shetty

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

Redirect to India's Ultimate Warrior. The coverage seems to be WP:BLP1E as it is all from March 2022, when he won the competition. JTtheOG (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Television, and India. JTtheOG (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vedprakash Dongaonkar

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

Fails WP:NPROF, WP:WRITER or WP:ANYBIO. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and India. Shellwood (talk) 16:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:PROF as in a non-notable position. Fails WP:GNG as no significant coverage sources were found, and WP:AUTHOR as the books are non-notable. In my view, it does not meet any notability criteria. GrabUp - Talk 16:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not meet WP:GNG, WP:PROF, as there isn't even a single reliable reference to support his significance. Dcotos (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Maharashtra. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khomlang Laman

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

No WP:SIGCOV sources were found to meet WP:GNG, and there are no multiple nationally known critical reviews to meet WP:NFILM. The article cites unreliable sources, such as YouTube and BookMyShow. GrabUp - Talk 12:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, India, and Manipur. GrabUp - Talk 12:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Abenao Elangbam#Filmpgraphy: lead actress. Another member of the cast has a page but plays a supporting role. Cinema of Manipur has lists of films and could be considered too but the actress seems a more appropriate target (the film is mentioned there and not in the general article). There is no List of Manipuri films for 2024. Can be redirected there later if the page is created. A redirect will allow to preserve history. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Right to Recall Party

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

Fails WP:GNG. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 11:20, 29 September 2024 (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/2024 September 29. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Organizations, India, and Gujarat. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:33, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Northwest India (pre-1947)

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

Article about a non topic, consisting of snippets of information we already cover properly and in depth in other articles. Mccapra (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Pakistan and India. Mccapra (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify or delete if not improved: The article is extremely sparse at present and everything there is already covered in other articles. But the historical-cultural idea of "northwest India" (as opposed to specifically the Indus Valley, Punjab, etc.) does seem to have some scholarly attention, at least from outsiders: [2], [3]. If the article weren't fairly new, I would be a firm delete, but I'm willing to give the author the benefit of the doubt for now. But the article as it is isn't ready for mainspace. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the author of the article, I don't have much to add to it or to voice on its fate.

Some options might be to merge the contents into Northwestern South Asia, or if seen as necessary, to create a new article called 'Northwestern Indian subcontinent' and then include the post-1947 history of the region as well into that article. GreekApple123 (talk) 16:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Geography. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Than Singh Doli

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

This person does not qualify for a standalone Wikipedia page because he lost the election and he is not a member of the respective assembly. TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Obviously, this fails WP:NPOL. How was this article not nominated at the time of creation? Candidacy does not inherently make someone notable. Also, thanks to TheSlumPanda for nominating it. GrabUp - Talk 08:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted a message to the NPP editor who marked this article as reviewed, which is the reason this article wasn’t taken to AfD. GrabUp - Talk 08:48, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, election spam. Geschichte (talk) 08:59, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No claim to notability, fails WP:NPOL. AusLondonder (talk) 13:32, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ajja Jhala

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

Yet another installment of a WP:WALLEDGARDEN on the Jhala family created by a now-blocked sockmaster. The core sources for these articles are books of purported genealogy published by Jhala family descendants. This article takes a legendary genealogy and launders the sources to present it as history:

Genealogy, Archive, Image: Interpreting Dynastic History in Western India is edited by two Jhala family members, including one who presents himself as the current head of the Jhala dynasty and heir of its legendary founder. It presents a fantastic story of Ajja Jhala leading an army into battle headless.
Ulian's Rajput is a self-published book that repeats and embellishes the same rather fantastic legends.
This book is self-published through vanity press Notion Press.
The article also cites two explicitly fictional works to support factual claims: The Flute and the Sword and The Hero of the Aravalis.

Meanwhile, the independent/reliable sources do not present any of this legendary material as fact or otherwise.

Bhardwaj's Hemu gives a brief mention to Ajja Jhala (p. 49 and the same anecdote repeated on p. 87).
Hooja's A History of Rajasthan gives a single mention to Ajja Jhala.

In short, what WP:SIGCOV we have on the Ajja Jhala includes legend repeated by WP:SPS and WP:COI sources, making it a failure on WP:V. The independent coverage, such as it is, does not establish facts about this figure as presented in the article and is not sufficient SIGCOV to pass WP:GNG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 06:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and India. Dclemens1971 (talk) 06:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom's thorough reasoning. APK hi :-) (talk) 06:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Mostly poor to unreliable sources and the somewhat reliable sources have entry to passing mention with no WP:SIGCOV. RangersRus (talk) 21:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The authors are of course interested in propping up their fanaticized family history. WP is not the place for this kind of promo. --Greens vs. Blacks (talk) 15:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jhala dynasty

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

This article is another installment of a WP:WALLEDGARDEN on the Jhala family created by a now-blocked sockmaster. (See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harpal Dev Makwana for an example of a deleted article in this set and Jhala (clan) for an appropriately sourced version not created by a sockmaster. The core sources for these articles are books of purported genealogy published by Jhala family descendants. This article takes a legendary genealogy and launders the sources to present it as history:

The first set of sources are the unreliable ones:

Genealogy, Archive, Image: Interpreting Dynastic History in Western India is edited by two Jhala family members, including one who presents himself as heir and descendent of Harpal Dev and the current head of the so-called "dynasty." It includes fantastic stories from the vahi (legendary geneaologies of high-caste Indian families), for example one figure defeating a ghost in battle and marrying a goddess who supernaturally rescues their children from an elephant.
Ulian's Rajput is a self-published book that repeats and embellishes the same rather fantastic legends.
Kumarapala-prabandha appears to be mostly a repetition of legends
This book is self-published through vanity press Notion Press.

Meanwhile, the independent sources do not present any of this legendary genealogy.

Ramusack's The Indian Princes and Their States has a single WP:TRIVIALMENTION of the Jhalas (page 73)
Naravane's The Rajputs of Rajputana has a single paragraph describing the Jhalas as a "minor clan."
Singhji's The Rajputs of Saurashtra discusses the Jhala Rajputs but says of the earlier stories, "Bardic tales about their migrations from the Himalayan region to Sindh seem to contain little truth."

Additional sources include WP:RAJ-era surveys of questionable reliability and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS in a gazetteer.

In short, what WP:SIGCOV we have on the Jhala dynasty includes legend repeated by WP:SPS and WP:COI sources. The independent coverage, such as it is, does not establish facts about this dynasty as presented in the article. With an adequately sourced article on the Jhala (clan) I think the best approach to this compromised article is WP:TNT. Bottom line: Fails WP:V and WP:GNG for lack of SIGCOV in independent, reliable, secondary sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and India. Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Looking at the article page, it does not seem to contain any far-fetched claims except the Origin section which should be renamed to 'Origin legend' or clarified that it is a traditional legend.

Also, the argument for unreliabity of the source Genealogy, Archive, Image: Interpreting Dynastic History in Western India being that the co-author is a Jhala doesn't seem valid considering that there are probably a million of Jhala people and shouldn't make them ineligible to write on the subject. Both the authors are also scholars in anthropolgy with Jhala having served as the Professor of Anthropology at Temple University as per the linked press release.

I do believe more context can be added regarding the tradtional sources the authors have used. But deleting the article would be an extreme step. The subject is very much notable. Many later kingdoms, states and principalities claimed descent from the members of this dynasty. Thank you. Krayon95 (talk) 09:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with Genealogy, Archive, Image isn’t only that it’s written by Jhalas. It’s that one of the authors claims to be the head of the dynasty (see link above) and the book is an effort to launder legends into a historical account. The other reliable sources to discuss the Jhalas do not do this, as I noted above. The appropriately sourced Jhala (clan) article covers this ground without retailing legends as facts. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Mostly poor to unreliable sources to WP:RAJ and does not meet WP:HISTRS and the somewhat reliable sources have entry to passing mention with no WP:SIGCOV. RangersRus (talk) 21:47, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Velpula Sarayu

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG. I would have possibly declined for the second time, but it does appear that the creator has made up their mind that she ranks the 6th in an unknown women category of a chess competition. The subject has participated in non notable competition, and has appeared in few sources, but there aren't WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Sports, and India. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Telangana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nomination. But why did you accept this AfC draft? TrangaBellam (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Non-notable chess player who played in non-nontable tournaments and has not made a significant and substantial achievement nationally or internationally worthy of notice to warrant a page on. Fails WP:NBIO, WP:SPORTCRIT, WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 21:32, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. OP's acceptance of the AfC draft only to nominate it for deletion a minute later makes me concerned something WP:POINTy is going on. AfD does not exist to be used as a tool for making some kind of point to another editor. It's a process that costs a lot of time. If OP thought the topic was not notable, then OP should've saved us all the trouble by not accepting the submission at AfC. In any event, the topic apparently had one of the most sensational results in chess history, and there's multiple sources covering Sarayu, including in the context of that apparently landmark and sensational showing: [4] [5]. The particular competition's prominence might not personally impress OP (or at least, OP since a minute after accepting the article at AfC), but it apparently impressed people who observe and write about chess. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 08:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ravieshwar Singh

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG. It's just the blatant non adherence to the reviewer's comment/decline reason by the page creator/submitter. If we are considering the sources, they are mostly WP:SELFPUB. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Businesspeople, Entertainment, Fashion, and United States of America. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Law, India, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not notable, self-published sourcing, and editor has not taken into account advice. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 05:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - editor corrected TV Guide link, author published through reputable sources (not blogs), many citations to his work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B837:8C03:E011:E929:8629:EFF (talk) 16:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not notable. If it is kept then "Rgs21" should clarify if they have any link to Ravi Guru Singh, the nickname of the article subject. Ttwaring (talk) 17:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - substantively this page has more citations and support than many other notability pages. Rgs21 may be on vacation or unavailable and the page should not hinge on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.114.12 (talk) 15:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kankanala Sports Group

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

Fails the notability guideline for organizations. None of the reliable sources in the article contain significant coverage of the subject, only mentions or coverage of related subjects. Looking for more sources did not uncover anything promising. There's also a concern that the creator of this article has an undisclosed conflict of interest due to the sometimes less-than-neutral prose. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Sports, Badminton, Handball, Motorsport, and India. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Telangana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of people involved in the Maratha Empire

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

List fails WP:NLIST. The list as a whole is not described in reliable sources. GTrang (talk) 18:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Maratha Empire had a very significant impact on Indian history. It spanned more than 100 years and rule over majority of India. So it is very notable. Crashed greek (talk) 04:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Veetuku Veedu Vaasapadi

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

The references fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA or are otherwise unreliable. A WP:BEFORE was unable to find any significant coverage showing how this would be independently notable. Two editors (including myself) attempted to redirect to original Kahaani Ghar Ghar Kii but IPs (likely LOGOUTSOCKin) have challenged so here we are. Would have recommend a redirect as an AP:ATD but doesn't seem that is an option at this point since that was challenged. CNMall41 (talk) 18:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. CNMall41 (talk) 18:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kahaani Ghar Ghar Kii#Adaptations: given the existing coverage; not opposed to Keep if other users think a standalone page is OK. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:58, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:59, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Indian podcasts

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

Promotional article fails WP:NLIST. Almost all items are non-notable. Ratnahastin (talk) 08:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:53, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards Weak Keep. I don't see how the article is promotional and its a well sourced list. It serve as a informational list per WP:LISTPURP. The problem is it needed more expansion. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 15:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NLIST because Indian podcasts have been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, which is demonstrated by the cited sources. TipsyElephant (talk) 18:34, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nuri Mian

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

Editors tend to believe that AFC is fabricated with accepting special drafts and abandoning others. Very funny. I don't see how this drat, now an article, meets WP:GNG. Owing a non notable company doesn't show notability in any way. The article is very promotional, and doesn't appear to be notable in the future (eye sighted observation). A community consensus would clearly address its problem. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV. APK hi :-) (talk) 07:04, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, though firstly to nom, you didn't have to accept the draft if you thought it non-notable, even though it had waited a while (the fact it had waited suggests others felt the same). That aside, reviewing a number of refs doesn't sway me away from concurring with the nom statement. The entire "early life" section is cited to a google drive(!), and the apparent relevant file doesn't give me confidence in its integrity. The second paragraph isn't even about the subject, less the last paragraph, which tries to imply notability because he "built a big house". Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:11, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:39, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Ajmer

AfDs for this article:

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

This article has gotten a lot of attention from a series of Indian milhist sockpuppets that are particularly interested in embellishing histories of non-notable "battles" that are lost by Muslim forces. I find only two hits on google scholar at this title, and zero for its original title, "Battle of Anasagara". asilvering (talk) 21:11, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. asilvering (talk) 21:11, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:07, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete according to [6], entirely written by a WP:LLM. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
gptzero's false positive rate isn't great - but I agree, I believe this is an LLM creation. -- asilvering (talk) 23:54, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jyoti Ratre

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

The majority of coverage from reliable sources pertains to Mount Everest, while the remaining sources appear unreliable and lack in-depth coverage of the subject. Apart from climbing Mount Everest, she has no notable achievements in mountaineering, and the references related to her Everest climb are in general media rather than WP:CLIMBER media, making this seem like a case of WP:BLP1E. GrabUp - Talk 13:43, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Women, and India. GrabUp - Talk 13:43, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No coverage in climbing media so her climbs are not notable per WP:NCLIMBER; most coverage is in low-quality WP:NEWSORGINDIA sources. This is technically WP:BIO1E and not WP:BLP1E as she is not a WP:LOWPROFILE individual; she documented her activities on Instagram and gave interviews. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yup! Thanks for the correction. GrabUp - Talk 09:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per Helpful Raccoon and GrabUp, this is a case of BLP1E and a person who has zero notability in the climbing world (nothing in WP:NCLIMBER sources). There was a time when climbing Everest was notable but not anymore. We have other non-notable WP:NEWSORGINDIA-driven cases (and pseudo-records) in Category:Indian mountain climbers. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bham (film)

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

The sources do not meet WP:SIGCOV, and according to WP:ICTFSOURCES, The Times of India is not a reliable source. It fails to meet WP:GNG as no multiple critical reviews were cited, and therefore, it also fails WP:NFILM. GrabUp - Talk 12:23, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, India, and Gujarat. GrabUp - Talk 12:23, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. For the reasons in the well-justified nomination. Regards, BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 12:28, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Nothing in the article or from BEFORE to substantiate notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:46, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No prejudice against redirecting to Satish Davara#Filmography, by the way. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Satish Davara#Filmography: a standard ATD when director is notable and informations are verifiable. Therefore opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:06, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Satish Davara#Filmography: , could also WP:DRAFTIFY the article (or actually both!). Not enough there to show notability. Ravensfire (talk) 15:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kutch Gurjar Kshatriyas contributions to the Indian railways

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

POVCRUFT dedicated to the glorification of a particular caste largely based on WP:SYNTH and relies on unreliable WP:RAJ sources. There is no academic source that has given significant coverage to this subject. Ratnahastin (talk) 03:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this appears to be mainly OR, stitched together from snippets of material that are not about the topic in hand. Also from the language used it’s pretty clear that the creator had copied some material verbatim and not used their own words. Mccapra (talk) 04:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Transportation, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:26, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Too much WP:OR to deal with. Dympies (talk) 16:51, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is more of a personal essay than an article, and very much full of OR. No evidence that secondary sources have covered this as a specific topic. Even if they had, this would still merit WP:TNT. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queen consort of Awadh

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

Couldn't find any sources with Googling (it returns information about the British royalty when you exclude Wikipedia). I tried draftification, and it was immediately recreated. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and India. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Short comes up on Wikipedia, so maybe it could be more of a list-class article. I'd say redirect to Nawabs of Awadh, but I'm not sure what to retitle that to include queens consort. Maybe "Royalty of Awadh", and have Nawabs of Awadh redirect to that? Mrfoogles (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't really know what to put, but feel free to change it all to something more appropriate. They were unofficially known as the queen consorts, though. Noodles09 (talk) 18:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Nawabs of Awadh per Mrfoogles, considering the stub has no sources. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Nawabs of Awadh for now and perhaps list notable Queen consorts there. If that list grows large enough, we can restart Queen consort of Awadh. Pichpich (talk) 19:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, a more notable example would be Hazrat Mahal Noodles09 (talk) 21:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maratha campaigns in Gujarat

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

The article attempts to present very different and completely unrelated conflicts as a single conflict. The article is a clear case of WP:SYNTH. The sack of Surat in 1664 which the article presents as the beginning of the conflict was carried out by Shivaji prior to his coronation. This conflict is then connected by the article to the raids by the Dhabade Maratha clan which has no connection to Shivaji's raid. This is then listed with the Peshwa-Gaekwad conquest of the region which again has nothing to do with the beforementioned conflicts. No WP:RS has been provided that treats these separate conflicts as a singular one. PadFoot (talk) 11:33, 26 September 2024 (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/2024 September 26. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete reminds me of a similar case on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mewar–Delhi Sultanate Wars. Basically the two articles presented the same issue where users compiled a bunch of unrelated conflicts into one single war. Article should be deleted per WP:SYNTH. Someguywhosbored (talk) 07:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: Only substantial edits are by two socks of the same sockmaster. Agree with nominator's original reasoning as well. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 21:16, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some socks editing is not a reason for delete. That is ad hominem argument, wikipedia has a policy against it as well if not a rule. Crashed greek (talk) 04:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Maratha empire is a very impactful rule in India. And their expansion into Gujarat helped consolidate their power, and also helped expansion all the way up to Peshawar later. Crashed greek (talk) 04:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sejal Gupta

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

Fails WP:ENT and general notability guidelines. No significant contribution to films TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 11:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To films, no, but she's in the main cast of the TV series Kya Haal, Mr. Paanchal? and her career as a teen beauty pageant has received some coverage. Maybe an ATD exists?-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 11:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Haryana, and Punjab. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The article creator appears to be connected with an advertising agency and writes in a promotional style. Notability has not been demonstrated. Deb (talk) 08:40, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Santhwanam 2

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

Probable failure of the notability guideline for films, but the more pressing concern is the amount of sockpuppetry this article has attracted. I didn't think it was appropriate to tag this under CSD G5, as a few other editors have worked on this, but at least two socks have edited this, and most of the rest comes from IP addresses that have edited the same articles as the socks and geolocate to the same city, suggesting block evasion. I also have concerns about the sources, many of which look like paid promotion disguised as news coverage, and a quick look for better ones did not reveal anything promising. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, India, and Kerala. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The IPs have removed the redirect three times now despite the three editors who disagreed so I guess here we are. Sad we have to be here over SOCKing. Judging notability outside of the editor conduct, it fails WP:NFILM as there is no significant coverage. Out of the 12 sources on the page, only one could possibly be used. The rest are unreliable per WP:ICTFSOURCES or WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pandian_Stores_2#Adaptations: of which this is an adaptation. Not opposed to Keep at all given the existing coverage. Opposed to deletion. Note: the page was accepted through the AfC process, for what it's worth. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mushy Yank: Could you point to the sources you believe have the most significant coverage so we can better evaluate the subject's suitability under NFILM? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a film but a TV series, so, I don't mind you and other users judging it by NFILM standards, if you wish to do so (that could make sense, actually), but in general it's GNG that applies for TV series (WP:NTV being an essay, as I am sure you know, but just stating it for the record). Among bylined articles in English you have articles like https://www.news.keralatv.in/santhwanam-2-launch-date/ (and 5-6 similar articles by the same media outlet, in English) ; in Malayalam, also bylined, this kind of things (not great journalism) https://malayalam.oneindia.com/entertainment/santhwanam-2-asianet-released-a-new-promo-video-goes-viral-here-is-how-fans-reacted-461819.html https://malayalam.samayam.com/tv/celebrity-news/actress-gopika-anil-says-that-no-one-from-first-part-is-acting-in-the-santhwanam-2/amp_articleshow/110149785.cms seem to show this is popular enough. The content of The Times of India non-bylined articles might be challenged so I won't even mention it (but I suppose you had a look). I had redirected this myself at some point, I think (I seem to remember I did at least!), but that was challenged too, apparently. There are a lot of adaptations of the Tamil (5, 6 ?) original and their mentions are regularly removed from the tables, so for me, navigation-wise, as this seems quite popular and given the basic facts (including popularity) are verifiable with various sources, either R or K are good. Also, a detail, the fact that it's Santhwanam 2 but not a real sequel, as it has different characters, makes a redirect to the Santhwanam not the best option. For me a Keep would help the reader more efficiently but I understand the current coverage is not of extremely high quality, hence the suggested compromise. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:57, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing out that NFILM doesn't apply — that was a silly error on my part! However, the same issue prevents the subject from meeting GNG, and the links you've shared here don't help in that regard, except maybe Samayam Malayalam. Looking at the about pages for OneIndia and Kerala TV shows that they have no editorial team, and the latter seems to be a blog run by one person. I think keeping would be out of reach here, but the target you've mentioned for a possible redirect sounds good to me. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:21, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

State Karate Association of Bihar

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

This is a contested draftification. The subject fails the notability guideline for organizations. The sources in the article have only passing mentions of the subject, if that, and no significant coverage. A quick search for more turned up no other useable sources. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:10, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Martial arts, India, and Bihar. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:10, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Doesn't seem wiki notable, doesn't meet WP:GNG. Lekkha Moun (talk) 17:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't see significant independent coverage of the organization. Running tournaments is what karate organizations do and the other articles are about individual child competitors. Even if they're notable, an open question, the organization doesn't inherit notability from them. Papaursa (talk) 01:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dum TV Kannada

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

References are brief mentions or routine announcements. Parent page was soft deleted here. A possible redirect target would be Dangal (TV channel) as an WP:ATD. CNMall41 (talk) 21:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Companies, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 21:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. 4 sources on the page where source 1 domain does not exist anymore, source 2 is a deadlink, 3 is advertising site (fits unreliable) and just about announcement on the opening of the channel and source 4 is unreliable source with page not found. No significant coverage on the channel and fails to meet organization criterias to pass notability. Fails WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 15:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enterr10 Bangla

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

References are brief mentions or routine announcements. Parent page was soft deleted here. A possible redirect target would be Dangal (TV channel) as an WP:ATD. CNMall41 (talk) 21:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Companies, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 21:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Bengal-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 3 sources where 2 are WP:ROUTINE announcements and one has no coverage at all. No significant coverage on the channel and fails WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 15:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dangal 2

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

References are brief mentions or routine announcements. Parent page was soft deleted here. The only channel in this group that is possibly notable would be Dangal (TV channel) where I would recommend redirecting as an WP:ATD. Note that you will find a few in-depth sources but they are talking about the main Dangal channel, not Dangal 2. CNMall41 (talk) 21:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Companies, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 21:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor sources with no significant coverage on the channel and all are just WP:ROUTINE news about launch and annocement and passing mention and fails to meet organization criterias to pass notability. Fails WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 15:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enterr10 Rangeela

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

References are brief mentions or routine announcements. Parent page was soft deleted here. A possible redirect target would be Dangal (TV channel) as an WP:ATD. CNMall41 (talk) 21:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. CNMall41 (talk) 21:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CNMall41 (talk) 21:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Madhya Pradesh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor to unreliable to deadlink sources with no significant coverage on the channel and fails to meet organization criterias to pass notability. Fails WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 15:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Swagger Sharma

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

Non-notable youtuber. None of the sources in the article provide significant coverage of Sharma, and web searches reveal nothing that contributes to WP:GNG, just social media profiles, interviews, and paid-for advertorials. I don't think his work is significant enough for him to pass WP:NACTOR, either. Wham2001 (talk) 20:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Film, and India. Wham2001 (talk) 20:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Haryana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 14:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NACTOR. The youtuber has not made a remarkable or significant achievement, enough to deserve attention. The sources on the page do not have significant coverage on the subject and his career to pass WP:BIO. The reception segment on the page is also wrong and not supported by the source. RangersRus (talk) 15:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Promotional. Deb (talk) 08:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of reliable sources. The Times of Indian, like the one in NY, isn’t automatically reliable anymore. Bearian (talk) 19:05, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Vengamamba Perantalu

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

No sign of notability beyond existing on a list. Allan Nonymous (talk) 14:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and India. Allan Nonymous (talk) 14:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:PROMO page with two sources with one clearly unreliable BLOG and the other not secondary independent. This article does not have any beneficial contribution and does not warrant significant notability. RangersRus (talk) 15:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vansh Sayani

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

Child actor with a major role for one season of Baalveer Returns, but otherwise appears to be cameo's and minor roles. Source coverage outside of the primary sources and interviews is short / passing mentions and some publicity puff pieces. Many of the sources are this person's Facebook / Instagram account which does not help show notability. Article should return to being a Redirect to Baalveer. Ravensfire (talk) 13:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, and India. Ravensfire (talk) 13:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete / Restore redirect - Not notable per WP:NACTOR. Most of the sources are social media posts, very few WP:Independent. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry but he DOES meet WP:NACTOR. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: At least two roles in the main cast of Balika Vadhu 2 and Baalveer Returns, that are notable productions, have him meet WP:NACTOR. Other significant roles (recurring roles, in Pandya Store for example) and coverage allowing verification. Remove social media if you wish. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The show article has him as the teenage version of the main actor, and the provided source just says he will appear. There's nothing I can see to say that Sayani had a significant role. Can you find a good source to support this? I realize I'm probably missing some context here, but that's the problem with the article, there isn't much context. A review would be greatly helpful - but only a publicity source? Not as much. Ravensfire (talk) 15:28, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. https://www.latestly.com/entertainment/tv/baalveer-returns-dev-joshi-and-vansh-sayani-had-a-fun-time-exploring-the-street-food-of-delhi-1561972.html (not the best of sites but for an uncontroversial statement, it might serve) states he plays one of the "lead roles"; "this time the main lead of Baal Veer will be played by child artist Vansh Sayani. Vansh was last seen playing the role of of Kohra's son in Nazar. ", states the TOI (and again, can be considered an uncontroversial statement). Also see: https://filmyfocus.com/celebs/vansh-sayani. There's more in more or less reliable sources. I would say it allows to verify the significance of that particular role. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:49, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He's also in the recurring cast of Dil_Se_Dil_Tak, for example. I think he clearly meets the SNG. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom, opposed to Keep; not opposed to redirect. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 16:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@M S Hassan: you will need to unbold "keep". Bolded are seen as vote. RangersRus (talk) 17:59, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, unbolded. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 03:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. 17 sources on the page and all are poor. 11 of these sources are unreliable, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube and unreliable WP:ICTFSOURCES and the other 6 are passing mention and not independent. Subject fails WP:NACTOR. RangersRus (talk) 17:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete / Restore redirect - No WP:SIGCOV in independent sources to establish notability. --John B123 (talk) 19:27, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The actor is notable for playing major roles in two shows and recurring role in a movie. Instead of redirecting or deleting the page, it must be improved by adding reliable sources.

--000099999AB 03:06, 26 September 2024

Santadas Kathiababa

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Swami Santa Dasji Kathiababa

Articles for deletion/Santa Das Kathiababa

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

This has already been deleted four times and repeatedly recreated with unsatisfactory sourcing. I think it needs to be salted. Mccapra (talk) 06:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Hinduism and India. Mccapra (talk) 06:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt. Poor sources that fail WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. Sources are just random book on sale and couple others with not even passing mention from what I see. RangersRus (talk) 15:13, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for pragmatic reasons. The current article was created by the following block-evading socks of Srabanta Deb (see SPI investigations):

Srabanta Deb's talk page shows that some previous versions of it were speedy-deleted, in addition to the previous versions deleted after deletion discussions.

Whenever the article was deleted, Srabanta Deb or his socks recreated it, usually under a slightly different name; then after a few days he/she usually moved the recreated article to a new name to confuse people and to create redirects. Names used include: Santadas Kathiababa, Santa Das Kathiababa, Santadasji Kathia Baba, Santadasji Kathiababa, Santa Dasji Kathiababa, Swami Santadas Kathiababa, Swami Santa Das Kathiababa, Swami Santa Dasji Kathiababa (they all have deletion histories). So if you want to delete this article, you need not only to salt it, but to salt all likely variations on the name.

There are three pragmatic reasons for keeping this article:

Because whenever it has been deleted, it has been recreated shortly afterwards.
Because its article history has been useful in supporting sock puppet investigations against new socks of Srabanta Deb.
Because if we know where the article on Santadas Kathiababa is, we can keep an eye on the content. If a new sock wants to improve the article, he/she will need to read sources and use them to write statements that really are backed by those citations (which is not the case now). Until then the article will remain adorned with improvement templates making it clear to readers that the contents of the article are suspect.

-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He/she has never tried Swami Santadasji Kathia Baba, but if you do delete this article, I suggest salting that one too, because it fits the pattern of variations that he/she has tried.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All I can see is a bunch of modern unreliable sources dedicated to the glorification of this person. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:30, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Hindi songs recorded by Asha Bhosle

AfDs for this article:

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

Monstrously huge and growing unmaintainable fancruft list where most of the tracks do not pass WP:NMUSIC. This is a piece for Schott's Miscellany. Still fails WP:NLIST. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This article has already survived two attempted AfDs easily, and neither of those had a single vote to delete. The nominator this time was also the nominator of the second AfD, and this latest nomination has no acknowledgement of any of the successful arguments made by "Keep" voters previously. The second AfD did have some discussion of how the article is tough to maintain due to the singer's enormously prolific career, and perhaps splitting into multiple articles (perhaps by decade) could be considered. Otherwise this nomination is merely an attempt to pretend that the idea didn't already fail twice. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Absolutely not possible to handle this list. Fails WP:NLIST. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 07:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm relisting this discussion given the large participation on the 2nd nomination and the lack of participation here. Also, given two previous AFDs, this discusion is not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep the article clearly passes NLIST. This is neither WP:FANCRUFT, nor some indiscriminate collection of information, as the information in list is factual list of songs that were recorded. Asha Bhosale has been included in the Guinness book of world records for that source. As someone mentioned in the previous AFD not having this list will be stupid. If you folks personally can't handle it, then post about it on relevant wikiprojects, and stop working on the article. When the article "list of missing persons" got big, it was not deleted, it was split in decades — something which had been suggested to you already. Kindly stop nominating same notable article again-and-again. —usernamekiran (talk) 07:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (but improve). I already commented above but will formally vote here, because no viable argument has ever been made to delete this article. Two previous AfDs passed with flying colors with all votes to keep in compliance with policy, which the current nominator ignored. The one delete vote here, on how to "handle" the article, is invalid per several sub-policies at WP:SURMOUNTABLE. Granted, the article is indeed unwieldy, and like the above voter I recommend splitting it up into several new articles by decade. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:46, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd be interested in hearing the nominator's response to those editors arguing to Keep this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems a solid an unexceptional example of a list. It’s super long, but the decade / year links on the side make it super easy to navigate. Could it be improved with more links to the most important songs / more citations for individual songs or films? Yes, but the criteria is “are there sources in the world?” not “is the article as written currently fully sourced, and you have to assume those sources exist given the singers fame, longevity, and record breaking. Also… I know we are meant to ignore previous AfD discussions, but the last two have also been overwhelming for keep, and well discussed / argued. If nothing in the article has changed, seems strange to just keep doing it?

Absurdum4242 (talk) 16:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Maharashtra. —usernamekiran (talk) 02:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: (and split?) I think the article meets NLIST. The maintenance rationale is invalid, in my view. We can't delete an article because it is not being maintained, and I think we could solve the maintenance issue, in this case, by splitting the article as was discussed in second deletion nomination. Ratekreel (talk) 16:34, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NLC Dolly Gunj Solar Power Plant

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV Thewikizoomer (talk) 16:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As the page creator, I attempted to improve it by including a GlobalData report in the Further Reading section. However, if the majority of votes on this Afd support deletion, my only request is to merge this page with Andaman_and_Nicobar_Islands#Infrastructure. Charlie (talk) 07:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:33, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu University of America

AfDs for this article:

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

This institution is unaccredited, and SCHOOLOUTCOMES#2 cannot apply. Thus, it needs to pass the stringent WP:NORG, which it does not — there is no significant coverage of the subject in multiple reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Hinduism, India, United States of America, and Florida. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nomination. Doesn't meet notability, fails WP:SIGCOV. Ratekreel (talk) 23:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Page does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organization. Poor sources on the page with no significant coverage. Fails WP:NSCHOOL. RangersRus (talk) 11:40, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've expanded the article by adding several references, including to a fairly in-depth profile in the Orlando Sentinel, and to a book by a sociologist who describes the emergence of the university and calls it a "milestone". Notability is arguably established, and even if it isn't, more references with nontrivial material can be found. One of the primary purposes of notability guidelines is to ensure that there is sufficient material to create an informative article, and there is clearly enough published material on this university (even though one might wish for more so that an even meatier article would be possible). For further expansion, there just needs to be effort put in to tap that material and integrate it into the article. --Presearch (talk) 23:19, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have you noted that this "fairly in-depth profile" has no author? So, no — an advertorial (churnalism) in a local newspaper does NOT add toward notability.

Notability is arguably established, and even if it isn't, more references with nontrivial material can be found This article is at AfD because I (and others) believe that notability is not established and I am happy to see you accept that. Regrettably, we cannot speculate about sourcing esp. that we are discussing an organization in USA and not, say, Sudan! Further, WP:NEXIST cautions, However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface.

It's not my case that no sources exist — 1 and 2 from among the very few hits in Newspapers.com — but that they are trivial and/or they are routine run-of-the-mill coverage. TrangaBellam (talk) 07:23, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added several more sources, all with named authors, and arguably all from reliable sources. All of these provide "more than a trivial mention," and in some cases the university was indeed "the main topic of the source material", so each of these arguably contributes "significant coverage" for meeting general notability (WP:GNG)

Regarding the Orlando Sentinel article, that may now be moot, but it's worth noting that the newspaper is reputable, and the userfied (non-Wikipedia) essay on "churnalism" acknowledges that "If a reliable source decides to fact check a press release and write a story about it, it then meets the definition of coming from a reliable source" - that raises the question of whether an absence of named author is enough grounds to treat this article as unreliable when it's from an otherwise reputable source (have you found any duplicate versions of the same material on numerous sites?). (By the way, friend, I suspect you know that a statement that something "is arguably established" is different than stating that it is "not established") --Presearch (talk) 01:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"News India Times" is not even a RS in all probabilities. And, a couple of articles in India Abroad — a now-defunct publication aimed exclusively at the Indian diaspora with a peak circulation of ~ thirty thousand — do not make the entity wiki-notable; if anything, such meager coverage in such a niche publication only goes to demonstrate the non-notability.

Further, NCORP has a higher standard for sources to contribute toward notability. This is due to the levels of (undisclosed; see WP:TOI) paid-coverage frequently engaged in by business entities. So, we look for sources that do not mechanically reproduce what the organization says and show some critical engagement. TrangaBellam (talk) 05:42, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning keep. I get 290 hits on Newspapers.com, including the fairly substantial Mark I. Pinsky, "School of Thought: Hindu University begins journey in teaching... with a degree of karma", The Hilton Head Island Packet (July 3, 2004), p. 1-C, 3-C, and Amy Limbert, "Kuldip Gupta, 66, helped found, lead Hindu University of America", The Orlando Sentinel (February 9, 2007), p. B6. Also, "Hinduism: Studying the ancients", The Atlanta Constitution (September 28, 1996), p. G4; "Beavercreek: Online Hindu classes", Dayton Daily News (January 9, 2021), p. B3. BD2412 T 01:46, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Milky Mist Dairy

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

This dairy organization does not satisfy Wikipedia's notability criteria for corporations, as outlined in WP:NCORP and WP:ORGCRIT. Also, does not have sufficient coverage WP:SIGCOV in the reliable sources WP:RSP. Current page is WP:PROMO. Charlie (talk) 06:46, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Tamil Nadu. Charlie (talk) 06:46, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article reads like an advertisement. Maybe you should have tried G11 first. The sources do not meet WP:SIGCOV, and the subject fails to meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. The article includes the company’s products in a way that is entirely promotional. GrabUp - Talk 06:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GrabUp I am a bit cautious with CSD nowadays, as I have made mistakes in the past and my NPP training is not yet over. It's better to put this page through AfD. Let's hope this page gets updated and qualifies for WP:HEYMAN. Charlie (talk) 07:49, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:45, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor to unreliable sources. Clearly promotional page. Fails WP:N, WP:SIGCOV and WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 11:46, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:ORG major company with revenue of 120 million dollars per annum.122.172.87.137 (talk) 13:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Revenue is not a criterion for notability. Per WP:ORG, arbitrary statistics and numbers (such as number of employees, amount of revenue or raised capital, age of the company, etc.) are irrelevant for notability. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 21:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1979 Bangladesh-Indian skirmishes

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

No significant casualties, no WP:LASTING coverage. Wikipedia discourages articles based on WP:NOTNEWS and this is nothing more than that. Nxcrypto Message 14:34, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Bangladesh, and India. Shellwood (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:44, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - article seems well sourced, and several sources are in the late 2010s, some 40 years after the conflict itself, making a nonsense of the “no lasting coverage” claim… it’s… difficult not to see this as politically based spamming since the last couple of nominations on Indian-Bangladeshi border skirmishes from this same editor are just cut and paste, and they have nominated other similar articles last week too… I’ll assume good faith though, and just say that I disagree that the article meets the criteria for deletion based on the merits. Absurdum4242 (talk) 15:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is a notable incident, Lasting effect? It did have some. Nxcrypto, I noticed that you are copying the same message in similar AfD Discussions, Without even checking the page and It's content and aftermath a lot. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (Message)
True The 1979 clash is very notable and it does not violate Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. Nxcrypto for some reason is copying and pasting the same message in multiple AfD Discussions, And some people will not check the page and just want to delete it, So they will say "It does not establish WP:GNG and WP:Lasting", Even when, It is clearly notable event with coverage many years later. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (Message)
Citations - The page has several citations including from books and newspapers, some require subscription or have limited information but I think the page meets with General Notability Guidelines. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (Talk with BangladeshiEditorInSylhet)
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Creating an article by collecting outdated archives instead of modern sources ensures that the subject failed to attract lasting coverage. --Dympies (talk) 03:58, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 04:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The incident was itself so insignificant that it makes sense why it fails WP:GNG. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 15:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 16:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I remain confused at how the three last-minute delete votes on the day this was set to close can claim a lack of “modern sources” when the Indian Foreign Policy book, for example, was first written in 2007, with the 7th edition being linked to being published in 2018. Add in the cut and paste nature of the original nomination and… as much as I hate to suggest everyone isn’t arguing in good faith, this feels like brigading?

Also…. I don’t think that’s how WP:NOTNEWS works? Given that this happened almost 50 years ago? Absurdum4242 (talk) 18:11, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Absurdum4242: Notwithstanding how other participants have phrased it, WP:LASTING refers to lasting effects, not lasting coverage. The single 75-word paragraph in the book is lasting coverage, and distinguishes this event from some discussed at AfD recently which have none, but that paragraph's conclusion is telling: "forces of the two countries clashed but the tension soon cooled down." Nothing significant happened. No one was killed, injured, or taken prisoner; no territory, booty, or reparations changed hands; no new method of determining the border was adopted; no treaty was signed. The event was not a precedent or catalyst for anything. There were no lasting effects. The paragraph in the book suggests that the event may be worth a paragraph in an article more broadly focused on Bangladesh-India border relations. It is not suitable for a stand alone article. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:55, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so the correct WP would be WP:Continuedcoverge instead, where “ The duration of coverage is a strong indicator of whether an event has passing or lasting significance.”? Absurdum4242 (talk) 04:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes WP:GNG, enough coverage in WP:RS including editorials. Za-ari-masen (talk) 10:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. Not at all. Nxcrypto Message 08:36, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft if Needed - I suggest draft if this does get deleted. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet
Delete Yet to see a single source that addresses the concerns of the nom. Captain AmericanBurger1775 (talk) 16:25, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Bangladesh–India border as an alternative to deletion. This article is not primarily about the 1979 border firing. Three-quarters of it is about border incidents before or after that. The 1979 event had no lasting effect and there is limited sustained coverage of it in secondary sources, making it a poor choice of topic for a stand alone article. It would, however, be worth a paragraph in a broader article that put it in context with the many other exchanges of gunfire across this border. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aaragan

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

The article does not meet WP:GNG as no in-depth coverage of the subject has been found from reliable independent sources. The cited sources are mostly unreliable, and the reliable sources only provide passing mentions. Additionally, the article fails to meet WP:NFILM. It could potentially be recreated if multiple reviews from reliable independent sources are published after its release. GrabUp - Talk 12:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, India, and Tamil Nadu. GrabUp - Talk 12:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no issue i will move draft Monhiroe (talk) 12:02, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: kindly move to draft Monhiroe (talk) 13:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draftify. WP:TOOSOON and per nom. Sources are poor to unreliable with no significant coverage. Maybe after the release of the film, some sources with reviews and other significant coverage might come forth, and then the page can either be recreated or reedited with sources that meet secondary independent reliability criteria. For now fails WP:NFILM and WP:SIGCOV. RangersRus (talk) 12:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The creator himself had reDrafted it so that Draftification although not procedurally standard seemed pretty consensual among all contributors. This is therefore a (fair) procedural AfD and a consensus seems easy to reach if the creator confirms he agrees to Draftification. @Monhiroe:: what do you say? (Announced release on October, 4) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:40, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
done @Mushy Yank Monhiroe (talk) 15:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies and thanks! You had already done it indeed. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Monhiroe Mushy Yank, please page should not be moved to draft while this AFD is in place. RangersRus (talk) 16:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
?? I never said to move it during AfD and am rather aware we should wait for a close, mind you; just trying to make sure we can reach consensus as you can see if you read my comment with attention. Please amend your comment, thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
??? Why are you making big fuss about it? It is just a general comment. RangersRus (talk) 17:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why I am not surprised by your reply? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Signature Global

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

The primary citations center around the IPO listing and fundraising efforts. Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. At the time of this nomination, an agency had withdrawn a credit rating, and no analyst reports existed on the web. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. TCBT1CSI (talk) 08:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TCBT1CSI (talk) 08:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delhi and Haryana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The Nominator is doing nothing except marking the pages up for the deletion. They should read and understand the basics of Notability first. The subject passes the guidelines. Faizi Dehlvi (talk) 15:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you are familiar with the notability guidelines, would you mind adding them here by conducting a WP:SIRS? Discard IPO related news due to WP:CHURN, feel free to use anything else instead. TCBT1CSI (talk) 09:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2018

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

Based on same reasoning in the AfD for the 2023 ceremony. 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. Attempted (twice) to redirect as an WP:ATD but IPs who are likely UPE have removed every time so would be opposed to any redirect at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 19:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 19:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging the three other participants from the 2023 discussion - @TimothyBlue:, @RangersRus:, @Improvised but so real unicorn: in case you have other thoughts on this year from 2023.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as a standard WP:SPLITLIST -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Too many unneeded statistical data and the winners are already listed in Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards. No need for a standalone page for this. RangersRus (talk) 00:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:06, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2019

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

Based on same reasoning in the AfD for the 2023 ceremony. 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. Attempted (twice) to redirect as an WP:ATD but IPs who are likely UPE have removed every time so would be opposed to any redirect at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 19:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging the three other participants from the 2023 discussion - @TimothyBlue:, @RangersRus:, @Improvised but so real unicorn: in case you have other thoughts on this year from 2023.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as a standard WP:SPLITLIST -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Too many unneeded statistical data and the winners are already listed in Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards. It does not need to be a standalone page for this. RangersRus (talk) 00:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:06, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2020–21

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

Based on same reasoning in the AfD for the 2023 ceremony. 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. Attempted (twice) to redirect as an WP:ATD but IPs who are likely UPE have removed every time so would be opposed to any redirect at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 19:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging the three other participants from the 2023 discussion - @TimothyBlue:, @RangersRus:, @Improvised but so real unicorn: in case you have other thoughts on this year from 2023.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as a standard WP:SPLITLIST -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Too many unneeded statistical data and the winners are already listed in Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards. No need for a standalone page for this. RangersRus (talk) 00:09, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2022

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

Based on same reasoning in the AfD for the 2023 ceremony. 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. Attempted (twice) to redirect as an WP:ATD but IPs who are likely UPE have removed every time so would be opposed to any redirect at this point. CNMall41 (talk) 19:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also pinging the three other participants from the 2023 discussion - @TimothyBlue:, @RangersRus:, @Improvised but so real unicorn: in case you have other thoughts on this year from 2023.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as a standard WP:SPLITLIST -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have been through this before. SPLITLIST is not a notability guideline. Can you point out the references that talk about this as a whole? This vote is a continued fallacy by assertion. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Too many unneeded statistical data and the winners are already listed in Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards. No need for a standalone page for this. RangersRus (talk) 12:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tej Giri

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

Doesn't meet WP:NACTOR. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:34, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Entertainment, and India. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:35, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Nepal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, seems WP:TOOSOON. Or Redirect to List of Nepalese actors. nirmal (talk) 02:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Won't the inclusion in the list be challenged if he has no page himself? If the inclusion seems OK, I could support that outcome too, given the so-so coverage he received in Nepalese and the sourced list of films. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meet WP:NACTOR according to the given refrences ^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4]. for more info

References

^ "फिल्ममा 'ट्वीस्ट' ल्याउने चरित्र मेरो छ : तेज गिरी". www.ratopati.com (in Nepali). Retrieved 2024-09-17.
^ "तेज गिरी". www.ratopati.com (in Nepali). Retrieved 2024-09-17.
^ "तेज गिरी". Himalaya Times. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
^ "अभिनेता तेज गिरी भन्छन्: 'उपहार'मा मेरो अभिनय सुधारिएको छ". nepalkhabar (in Nepali). 2019-06-03. Retrieved 2024-09-17.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to review sources. User:Endrabcwizart, please remember to sign all discussion comments.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:56, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources presented by @Endrabcwizart are unreliable. Ratopati(1,2) and prixa.net (4) aren't reliable. The only reliable newspaper The Himalayan Times was linked from a tag, which doesn't justify notability. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shri Krishna (1993 TV series)

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

Sources on the page are unreliable and fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. A WP:BEFORE found nothing reliable, just more of the same. CNMall41 (talk) 07:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. CNMall41 (talk) 07:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_DD_National#Drama_series. I was thinking of redirect to the production company Sagar Films but this has no source on the page. RangersRus (talk) 11:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Given the existing coverage (such as https://www.republicworld.com/entertainment/television/after-ramayan-twitterati-welcome-ramanand-sagars-shri-krishna#google_vignette, https://theprint.in/india/after-ramayan-and-mahabharat-now-shri-krishna-to-return-on-dd/407561/ etc etc); or redirect (/as a historically important series for/) to the network. Very opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:52, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Hinduism. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:54, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As Mushy Yank said above, remove some sources, and find more reliable sources, but very opposed to deletion Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 20:50, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, after some research, I'm just finding out that 160 episodes were filmed with the actor "Swapnil Joshi" but then they were deleted and refilmed from episode 73, Tilak has also wiped some articles too just because they contained some footage. and while deleted by some user, It also did air on ZEE TV, it has many indecisive things, for exmaple some sources say it aired from '93 to '96 while others say it's aired from '93 to '96 but later shifted to DD1, some other say that it was aired in '99 on ZEE TV for the first time and some that it aired on DD2-Metro and shifted to ZEETV and/or DD, It's very hard to find truthful sources, as all talk about the same thing but say it differently. for say the example mentioned above. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 20:59, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rather keep it and do more research on it. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 21:00, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two mentions that verify it exists is hardly enough to establish notability. If that were the case, pretty much every television show would be notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:32, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely true, but it takes some time to find some reliable sources. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 05:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All articles talk about the same thing, just their matter is different, even with some or for say a lot of digging can be done but it results to the repetitive articles. Though for me deletion is not okay. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 05:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page has been up since 2009, and by now we all realize after quite some digging that no reliable sources with indepth significant coverage is to be found. Redirect is better than to keep. Right? RangersRus (talk) 12:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We could've redirected, if for say there was any good mention of it anywhere, but any mentions of it are exotic across wikipedia Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 15:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.republicworld.com/entertainment/television/krishna-cast-here-is-a-list-of-actors-and-the-characters-they-play

https://www.indiatoday.in/television/soaps/story/after-ramayan-ramanand-sagar-s-shri-krishna-to-return-on-doordarshan-1670255-2020-04-23

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/after-ramayans-end-viewers-welcome-ramanand-sagars-shri-krishna/articleshow/75547221.cms

https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/coronavirus/news/after-ramayan-shri-krishna-returns-to-dd/articleshow/75359729.cms

https://www.indiatvnews.com/photos/entertainment-swapnil-joshi-shri-krishna-ramayan-comedy-circus-mahasangram-611899

https://www.filmibeat.com/television/news/2020/after-ramayan-and-mahabharat-doordarshan-to-bring-back-ramanand-sagars-shri-krishna-298001.html

https://hindi.news18.com/news/entertainment/tv-ramayan-will-end-today-on-doordarshan-shri-krishna-will-start-from-ss-3073219.html

https://www.aajtak.in/entertainment/television/story/krishna-janmashtami-2022-date-18-or-19-august-know-where-is-ramanand-sagar-shri-krishna-show-cast-tmovf-1519979-2022-08-18

https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/tv/news/when-and-how-to-watch-shree-krishna-on-doordarshan/articleshow/75501800.cms

https://www.bhaskarhindi.com/city/mumbai/union-minister-piyush-goyal-congratulated-mahant-swami-maharaj-on-his-91st-birthday-1066201?infinitescroll=1

https://www.thelivemirror.com/doordarshan-brings-back-shri-krishna/

https://www.latestly.com/entertainment/tv/how-marathi-actor-swwapnil-joshi-became-the-common-link-between-dd-shows-uttar-ramayan-and-sri-krishna-1724038.html

https://www.indiatvnews.com/entertainment/tv/enjoyed-watching-ramayan-now-ramanand-sagar-s-shri-krishna-set-to-return-on-doordarshan-611513

https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/photomazza/tv-photogalleries/janmashtami-2023-top-show-shri-krishna-1993-cast-where-is-yashoda-maiya-damini-kanwal-shetty-now/photoshow/msid-103423057,picid-103423197.cms

https://www.financialexpress.com/life/entertainment-sri-krishna-telecast-time-on-dd-national-doordarshan-sri-krishna-broadcast-timing-daily-1946373/

https://amarujala.com/photo-gallery/entertainment/television/shri-krishna-actor-krishna-aka-sarvadaman-d-banerjee-now-where-is-he

https://www.jansatta.com/photos/entertainment-gallery/shri-krishna-actor-mahendra-muralidhar-dhule-played-bhima-ramanand-sagar-serial-sri-krishna-3-times-played-kumbhakaran-still-looks-like-young-boy/1439996/3/

https://www.hindustantimes.com/tv/shri-krishna-the-show-that-turned-swapnil-joshi-into-god/story-pRZnHUDgao6rAmuqEwsInL.html

https://www.naidunia.com/entertainment/bollywood-ramanand-sagar-shri-krishna-will-be-retelecast-on-dd-national-form-3-may-2020-know-its-timings-5530789

https://zeenews.india.com/hindi/entertainment/photo-gallery-krishna-janmashtami-2022-know-how-much-shri-krishna-cast-serial-1993-cast-change-in-29-years/1306669

https://hindi.scoopwhoop.com/entertainment/where-is-1993-shri-krishna-show-sudama-actor-mukul-nag/

https://www.jansatta.com/photos/entertainment-gallery/shri-krishna-radha-reshma-modi-played-in-many-bollywood-movie-after-27-years-he-looks-changed-photos-covid-19/1404748/

These are some sources that I found. I think they're reliable Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 16:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

wait https://www.bhaskarhindi.com/city/mumbai/union-minister-piyush-goyal-congratulated-mahant-swami-maharaj-on-his-91st-birthday-1066201?infinitescroll=1. is a wromg source help Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 20:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not worth entertaining a discussion when the first reference you supplied falls squarely under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Won't waste time looking at the rest as it seems to be a misunderstanding of what constitutes a reliable source. A redirect is acceptable as we can verify it exists, but nothing that shows it is notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so now that you mention that it falls Wikipedia:NEWSORGINDIA, I think, you're actually right. I think deletion would be ok, as there's no adequate source to find. (Ignore this here I was trying not to start an argument but oh well.) Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 07:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But again, I think this show deserves a page. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 07:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you changing your vote to delete?--CNMall41 (talk) 20:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no. I am not. This show is of significance and deserves a page, no arguing Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 22:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"I think, you're actually right. I think deletion would be ok, as there's no adequate source to find" - This is written as if you are. At least, it does agree there is no adequate sourcing so without it I am wondering your policy-based reasoning for keeping it. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is what I was thinking, until I kept finding stuff, Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 08:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also curious about this edit as you added content that is no where in the source. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The cast or the above para? Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 07:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about cast, I just corrected some errors, and if you're talking about the above para, It's common knowledge to know DD didn't stream it in '97 and hence it was handed to ZEE TV, and Sony & Star did stream it following 2001. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 07:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Common knowledge? I certainly didn't know about it. In Wikipedia we are allowed to state the obvious (e.g., the sky is blue), but what you added would be WP:OR at best. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any adequate source as all would "apparently fall under Wikipedia:NEWSORGINDIA", but here's a statement from the production team- https://production.sagarworld.com/shri-krishna Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 21:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Production company is considered primary and not secondary independent reliable source. RangersRus (talk) 23:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you need further source, here's an image of it airing on Zee TV, (footage is now deleted and replaced with SD Banerjee) Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 21:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Analysis of sources.
- Source 1 and 2 are announcement of airing the show.
- Source 3 has passing mention with sale of VCD and the price being sold for.
- Source 4 is primary source sagarworld founded by the son and grandson of Ramanand Sagar, Director and Producer of the show.
- Source 5 is interview wirh Moti Sagar, the youngest son of Director and Producer Ramanand Sagar of the show.
- Source 6 is intervew with Govind Khatri, an actor from the show about what role was originally offered to him and about his life after the series.
- Source 7,8,9,10,11,12 are all about Sarvadaman D. Banerjee (main lead of the show) and interview with him, on his life after the series.

All sources are poor with some WP:NEWSORGINDIA and no reliable source independent of the makers and actors of the show with indepth significant coverage to pass notability. RangersRus (talk) 23:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure your assessment is completely correct. Taking just one example, source 5 offers very significant coverage beside an interview, in a bylined article in a very reliable newspaper. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sourve 5 says "Krishna made Swapnil Joshi a star overnight; co-director Moti Sagar talks about the TV show." This source is not independent of the claim by the makers themselves. Source needs to be completely secondary independent. RangersRus (talk) 15:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do I have to copy and paste the whole article here? The major part is attributed to the journalist. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot make it any more clearer than what the journalist himself said on the top of his article about the maker talking about the show and anything that journalist wrote in that article is the outcome of the interview. It is not an indepedent source at all. I am leaving at that. RangersRus (talk) 16:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following parts can be attributed Kavita Awaasthi, journalist for The Hindustan Times, based on her interview with Sagar; the media outlet being considered generally reliable, they can be used to verify a number of facts that contribute to the notability of the program, such as, at least:

After making the successful TV show Ramayan, producer Ramanand Sagar wanted to tap into another epic show — the Bhagavat Puran. Produced by Ramanand, Subhash Sagar and Prem Sagar, and directed by Ramanand, Anand Sagar and Moti Sagar, Shri Krishna was one of the biggest grossers for Doordarshan during the seven years it was on air. The national broadcaster had a limit on the number of episodes it could air in the ’80s, but the ’90s brought about a change in these rules. A producer could now make a show for a longer duration.

Music composer Ravindra Jain composed the music for this serial. The title song, ‘Shree Krishna Govind Hare Murari’, became popular in India and abroad. The show ran for more than seven years, and had over 200 episodes. The show covered Krishna’s life, from his birth to the time of his grandchildren.

The show was shot in Gujarat’s Umbergaon and Vadodara, where they put up huge sets.

Swapnil had a huge fan following because of the show. People thought he was Krishna.

This, in my opinion, in a 2016 article about a 1993 program, can be given a certain credit and at least contributes to the apparent notability of the show (that had, as I am sure you have noticed, 221 episodes and originally aired during 6 years.....) and I think that the material, if the page was redirected, would be lost, which would be detrimental to the encyclopaedia. (And that's just one source). Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

^{omg finally for goodness' sake someone mentions this, I'm not trying to be rude but why can't someone just read the sources and watch the show for 2 whole minutes to get some fruit out of it. GOD! (replied to mushy yank)} Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 18:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There are reliable sources present, opposed to deletion. Imsaneikigai (talk) 14:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Demonstrate so called reliable sources present that has not already been analysed above. RangersRus (talk) 15:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_DD_National#Drama_series: where it will only need to be verifiable, which it is, rather than to have reliable sources proving notability, which it lacks. Owen× ☎ 17:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for additional and more thorough source analysis.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Girls' Hostel

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFILM. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 14:45, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I would tend to think that a 1962 film with notable cast, notable director, notable musicians is notable for historical reasons but if the various results of GBooks (added ~~one~~ 2) search are not judged sufficient, please redirect to the director's filmography. VERY opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:25, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yank, I have seen you say this in different AFDs, could you please point out the part of WP:NFILM that says we should keep films because it has notable casts? Definitely not going to be the second criteria of WP:NFIC. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My point is: pre-internet+ notable cast and director and musicians (not only because it has a notable cast) might be a case of Systemic Bias issue, if you really want a corresponding supplemental page to refer my !vote to. My point is: off-line sources probably exist and when I mention that, I generally suggest an ATD (a redirect to a list or to the director, as you do below; when it's verifiable of course.) Thank you for your concern. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:44, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No secondary independent reliable sources with indepth coverage on the film. One source on the page that claims to be a review is just a Google snippet and is not review. Page fails WP:NFILM, WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. I am not opposed to redirect to director's filmography. RangersRus (talk) 13:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Mushy Yank, notable cast , notable director, notable musicians.122.172.82.231 (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
— This IP has made few or no other edits outside this AfD. Lamona (talk) 18:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear more opinions on whether or not this subject meets WP:NFILM. Also, since a Redirect was brought up, please supply a link to the suggested target article. Thank you.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:44, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's difficult to find sources for something that appeared in 1962 and didn't endure. There was a TV show with the same name which seems to be quite popular and that is what pops up in searches. I did find that a CD had be made of the music but that's all. Lamona (talk) 03:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Hindi films of 1962: Although this film doesn't meet WP:NFILM, this coverage is small but showed that the film may be historical as well as added to the career of Nalini Jaywant, hence redirect to List of Hindi films of 1962 instead of deletion. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:31, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replying also to Liz. (I would prefer a Keep but) if a Redirect is chosen, the target suggested by SafariScribe clearly makes sense; however, I would tend to think that regarding a film a redirect to the director should always be favoured when it is possible, as it is closer to the subject than a more general list (in the present case, Ravindra_Dave#Hindi_cinema. Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:56, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
General note: There is a generally accepted working consensus regarding released films with notable cast and/or made by a notable director (and/or including the participation of notable personalities (musicians, writers, etc). The said consensus is that such articles are redirected to a list of films by year/country or to the article about their director when they can, if reliable sources allow verification. When such films are mentioned as critical and/or commercial successes especially pre-internet films, and, again, given coverage allows verification, their cultural and historical significance is generally considered a sufficient reason to retain a standalone page. Either way, the consensus is that such pages are generally not deleted.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus seen here. I'm not sure that a few more days will resolve this, along with the competing suggestions for a Redirect target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:13, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Dastak

AfDs for this article:

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

I have multiple reasons for proposing this article for deletion. Firstly, the page creator is blocked. Secondly, all the references provided are fabricated. The page creator has deceptively used the term 'National Dastak' in the title to mislead other editors. The article fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:WEB from any perspective." Youknow? (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Websites, and India. Youknow? (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The sources do exist, but they're all trivial mentions in lists or attributions - not the kind of discussion of the subject needed to show notability. Adam Sampson (talk) 20:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. This is not G5 eligible, as the creator was not a sock of a then-blocked editor: as such the creator's block is not relevant. And the basic facts provided in the article do check out, it's obviously not a hoax. Whether it's notable, I'm less certain: there is coverage, including articles focused on on this channel: [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], and a handful of others. There's not a lot of detail, hence "weak". Vanamonde93 (talk) 20:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Reviewed the page and the sources and I do see where the mislead was attempted where title of the sources were changed.
- Source 1 misleading title on the page is "#BeingADalit: How the Online Boom news websites like National Dastak that talk of Bahujan samaj" but the actual title is "#BeingADalit: How the Online Boom is Helping Dalits Reclaim and Reassert Their Identity". There is nothing in the source except for passing mention that says "Yadav has previously worked with news websites like National Dastak that talk of Bahujan samaj."
- Source 2 misleading title on the page is "National Dastak, which provide reportage and videos from a Bahujan perspective to counter the perspective of the upper caste-dominated mainstream English and Hindi media" but the actual title is "BSP war room is turning up the heat on BJP and SP". The source has nothing significant except for passing mention that says "There are also news portals like National Dastak, which provide reportage and videos from a 'Bahujan' perspective to counter the perspective of the upper caste-dominated mainstream English and Hindi media."
- Source 3 has passing mention that goes "There are YouTube channels widely watched by Dalits, including National Dastak...".
- Source 4 has passing mention that goes "Web channel National Dastak played the video of Chandrashekhar Azad addressing the protesters."
- Source 5 has misleading title on the page that says "As per a report of the National Dastak, Riya Singh, a Dalit will pursue Ph D in Women's Studies" but the actual title of the source is "Riya Singh, a Dalit, tops TISS entrance exam". This source has nothing except for passing mention that is shown in the misleading title of the source.
- Source 6 has passing mention that says "In Uttar Pradesh, BJP is the single largest party across the polls except for National Dastak which is predicting BSP victory."
- Source 7 has passing mention that says "Speaking to National Dastak after organizing ‘Blood donation’ programme".
- Source 8 has passing mention "Videos on National Dastak have over 88 crore views." All the sources are poor with no significant coverage on the channel. Fails WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 18:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is based on the sources that exist, not ones that are in the article. When I have provided other sources above, you need to demonstrate that they do not confer notability. Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did not look at the sources you provided in your vote but I did now. Source 1 is giving me 404 error, source 2,4,5,6 are all same WP:ROUTINE news about union government asking YouTube to take down ‘National Dastak’ from its platform. Source 2 is likely unreliable as Mumbai Mirror's about us page has comments from Wikipedia and the disclaimer says that it does not take responsibility for the reports by contributors. Source 3 is about the Journalist Anmol Pritam who works for YouTube channel National Dastak and was forced to chant a slogan by a mob and the article has also claims made by the journalist himself to another news media. This is all routine news. Not enough to pass WP:NCORP imv. RangersRus (talk) 20:28, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Vanamonde93 added Ref and WP:NEXIST there is Hindi coverage about the channel.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The issue is that the additional sources provided do not meet WP:WEBCRIT. All of the sources except for two fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA so they are not reliable. This one simply mentions a journalist that works for National Dastak while this one provides some detail but isn't in-depth (and if considered in-depth, that leaves one reference). --CNMall41 (talk) 07:29, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep with million subscribers, this channel is one of the most important YouTube news platform and I think a lot of reference will be found if searched.

Admantine123 (talk) 09:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Admantine123, it's the responsibility of editors wanting to Keep an article to go out and locate those reliable sources as Vanamonde93 has done. I'm not sure who else you thought would spend the time in this "search". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with million subscribers and has Hindi coverage.122.172.87.137 (talk) 13:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ha Khel Sawalyancha

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

Cannot locate sources to show notability. There are a few mentions but nothing that amount to significant coverage. CNMall41 (talk) 18:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. CNMall41 (talk) 18:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: because this is a 1976 film and cast, music director and director are all notable and it contributes to the notability of the film. Or redirect to Vasant Joglekar. Very opposed to deletion of the page. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have seen many notable actors act films that aren't notable. So, citing the notable casts of the film is good but not when there aren't sources even to verify that they acted the film. This is eventually not part of WP:NFIC#2. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:41, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My point is: The cast+the director+the music director are notable, and it is a 1976 film, therefore (perhaps non-English) off-line contemporary sources might (or more likely, probably) exist (see below). I also indicate an ATD, fwiw. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I am bit confused, You added a SourcesExist template yourself, was it by mistake? And sources have been added since nomination, some allowing partial verification of the cast (or simply look at the poster if you wish), some looking reliable but not allowing it so far. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor and unreliable sources. Fails WP:NFILM and WP:SIGCOV. RangersRus (talk) 22:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source analysis.
- Source 1 is unreliable source and the listing is copied from imdb with reference to imdb. No significant coverage on the film.
- Source 2 is same listing of cast, director, producer, musicians. No significant coverage.
- Source 3 is a link to a song on YouTube video. Nothing significant here either.

I looked for sources online to get significant coverage and WP:NFILM but after 4 pages of search, I could not find any secondary independent reliable sources. RangersRus (talk) 11:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I referenced two sources in Award section and noted a film in several Marathi books such as -.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Morekar (talk • contribs)
@User:Morekar, the books you provided here aren't verifiable. Please read WP:OFFLINESOURCES and provide the full bibliographical details, most importantly, the page numbers. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done.@SafariScribe Allows to verify the film was a great success according to sources (not to mention the cast, plot, themes, etc). Thank you for your concern. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:49, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note. None of the new sources with Google books links are verifiable. All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation with page number(s) to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution. RangersRus (talk) 10:44, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I hate redirects being turned up after redirecting and I would prefer deletion to an obviously non notable article. While we try to save an article as much as possible per WP:ATD, we should be careful to avoid leaving non notable ones as redirects (my opinion). This article, to all eyes, doesn't meet WP:NFILM and if the casts are notable, then there should be a bit, atleast, WP:SIGCOV. Bearing the lack of SIGCOV in mind, I would be ready to redirect to the director's article (who also clearly doesn't meet WP:NDIRECTOR) if reliable sources that could be used to verify the cast and crew of the film are provided. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:46, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are imv sources on the page to verify partially the cast and crew. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. All the changes have been reviewed and analyzed in my last note. RangersRus (talk) 19:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of them, indeed, the Gbooks refs, are mentioned as a whole in your general note ("reviewed and analysed" is a bit of an overstatement, I’m afraid, as yourself stated you couldn’t access them, :D); but still, the page has significantly changed. Also see WP: Systemic bias, thank you very much. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:11, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not surprised by your response. As i said earlier the so called "significant changes", the Google books fail verification with no page number and inline citation and that is my review and analysis about it if you could pay attention. See WP:V. RangersRus (talk) 20:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn’t mean to surprise you but I did pay attention, thank you; that is precisely why I think that calling your note a ’review and analysis’ of those sources is a tiny bit misleading. You just couldn’t access and verify them. It would be better indeed if we could, but again see the link that I provided above. The changes are significant, maybe not satisfactory, I agree, because we cannot check the full text, but significant, they are, and stating otherwise is also rather a little misleading. People who have visited the page before nomination can check it now and see if they can verify the added sources, for example or if they find them useful; hence my insertion of the template, which your comment tries to undermine unduly, in my view. If so-called should apply to something it is not to the 'significant changes', I should say. Consider this my final reply to you as I do not care very much for the tone of your last reply, to be honest. Thank you again for your reply and concern. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you but it is no help and thank you for your final reply. Nothing significant as expected. RangersRus (talk) 21:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: a rapid check allowed me to verify 3 of the sources added through Gbooks (I added the page for 2 ). I see now even less reasons to doubt the veracity of the sources added by Morekar. I thought there might have been a transcription problem but no, the title in most of the cited English sources apparently corresponds to the title of the article. I’ll do my best to add the pages of other sources cited, though, as this might be helpful.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC) (I have added the pages to all of the significant references added by Morekar, that should now be considered verifiable and verified :D; I will not re-add the AfD changed template, though :D; )[reply]

How are these "significant references" again? Verifiability is not notability unfortunately. Are you able to show what RangerRus is requesting below? I am willing to withdraw the nomination if it turns out t be significant coverage but I cannot locate anything either. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:57, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I took time and verified all the pages on each Google sources on the page and the claims it made (even though the onus is on the editor who adds the source to provide verification), there is nothing significant. No significant coverage in any source and even the source under reception is not even a review but just a passing mention. RangersRus (talk) 23:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I was making that assumption based on no replies from previous requests as well. Thanks for taking the time. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:50, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:@Morekar: Can you please provide page numbers along with inline citation of what the sources actually say to check if it is just an entry or something significant. We need significant coverage and I googled but just found entries and nothing significant. If you can provide all the information that helps with the content for verification, it will help. RangersRus (talk) 21:52, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to verify all the sources you added and as expected nothing significant to pass WP:NFILM. RangersRus (talk) 23:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AfD participants are invited, by the template inserted above in the discussion, to read the page and not simply assume or assert the changes are not significant and the sources add no weight to notability. A single source, for example, stating the film was a ’superhit’ (source wording) is significant per se. And denying it is at best bizarre.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:57, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being a 'super hit' does not make something notable. It must be shown so through significant coverage. What is "bizarre" is that two editors have asked for the excerpts of those references that some are citing as significant yet nothing has been provided except assertions.--CNMall41 (talk) 18:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further analysis of whether the available sources provide significant coverage would be appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All Source analysis.
- Source 1 Google snippet page 161, has an entry with film name, language of the film, color, length, name of director, producer, musician, and four cast members followed with "Woman fears servants ghost haunts bungalow." That's it. No significant coverage.
- Source 2, Google Snippet page 130 has an entry with translation of the film title. No significant coverage.
- Source 3, Google snippet page 22, has an entry, "crime thrillers (title of three different films, one of which is the subject)". No significant coverage.
- Source 4, Google Snippet page 139 is by a filmmaker and scriptwriter of same industry and very likely a self published through "Maharashtra Film, Stage & Cultural Development Corporation" who are also the contributor, has passing mention "Ha Khel Savlyancha ( 1976 ) , a suspense thriller interwoven with a supernatural legend , be- came a superhit but could not wean the indus- try away from its famnily melodramas ." (That is exactly how family is misspelled). Keeping the unreliability question aside, still no significant coverage.
- Source 5 Unreliable sources that is a blog indiancine.ma and the listing is copied from imdb with reference to imdb. No significant coverage on the film.
- Source 6 is same listing of cast, director, producer, musicians. No significant coverage.
- Source 7 passing mention of film critically and commercially acclaimed and one of the actor Jairam played memorable role in highest grossing film of the time. Not significant coverage on the film.
- Source 8 is link to YouTube video of a song. No coverage at all.
- Source 9, 10 are same books with Google snippet page 40, reads Best Music Director and best color photography for the film (does not mention awarded by who or what award show). No significant coverage anyhow.
- Source 11 and 13 are snippets from same book with no page numbers. One snippet with entry of DVD release in 2009 and the other snippet in few words that the film "deeply rooted in the village life of Maharashtra". No significant coverage.
- Source 12 is about one of the song from the film remade for modern audiences. Nothing significant again.

Entries, trivial and passing mention only and no source addresses the topic directly and in detail. RangersRus (talk) 12:49, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great analysis which just reaffirms (for me) that it exists, but verification is not notability. Thanks for doing the digging. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General note: There is a generally accepted working consensus regarding released films with notable cast and/or made by a notable director (and/or including the participation of notable personalities (musicians, writers, etc). The said consensus is that such articles are redirected to a list of films by year/country or to the article about their director when they can, if reliable sources allow verification. When such films are mentioned as critical and/or commercial successes especially pre-internet films, and, again, given coverage allows verification, their cultural and historical significance is generally considered a sufficient reason to retain a standalone page. Either way, the consensus is that such pages are generally not deleted.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect is not an issue but "not deleted" is not the same thing as "keep." WP:NFO says reiterates what you say but means that sources are "likely to exists" showing notability. Unfortunately, those sources do not exist here.--CNMall41 (talk) 20:42, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Files for deletion

Category discussion debates

Template discussion debates

Redirects for deletion

MFD discussion debates

Other deletion discussions

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

[1] "फिल्ममा 'ट्वीस्ट' ल्याउने चरित्र मेरो छ : तेज गिरी". www.ratopati.com (in Nepali). Retrieved 2024-09-17.

[2] "तेज गिरी". www.ratopati.com (in Nepali). Retrieved 2024-09-17.

[3] "तेज गिरी". Himalaya Times. Retrieved 2024-09-17.

[4] "अभिनेता तेज गिरी भन्छन्: 'उपहार'मा मेरो अभिनय सुधारिएको छ". nepalkhabar (in Nepali). 2019-06-03. Retrieved 2024-09-17.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]