Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamal Thakur

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was userfy. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 22:34, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Kamal Thakur

Kamal Thakur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

The subject fails to pass WP:GNG and I can not find significant coverage in independent secondary reliable sources to support WP:NBIO. GSS (talk) 15:57, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 15:58, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 15:58, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 15:58, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

• Delete. I think that he may be notable, author just needs more reliable sources. I would delete it in its current state, although. If the author adds sources, it would be nice if somebody would ping me. RileyBugz^{Yell at me} | _Edits 16:02, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
• Delete. I don't see reliable sources that would help support notability. Ditto for ping if more sources are found. PS. The creator is asking for more time to fix article at Talk:Kamal Thakur, so let's give him 2-3 weeks with a relist in AGF if needed.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:15, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

@RileyBugz and Piotrus: I dont mind waiting for couple of weeks so let's see what author can provide that we failed to find. Cheers – GSS (talk) 17:25, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

@GSS-1987: I agree, how about 2 weeks or so, including the speedy deletion closing time. RileyBugz^{Yell at me} | _Edits 23:49, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

@RileyBugz: How about if an Admin close this AfD as per the present consensus and the current state of the article which fails to pass WP:NBIO and then userfy or draftify this article where the author can work for as long as they want. I tried my best but again my search attempt as per WP:INDAFD comes up with nothing. GSS (talk) 06:36, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

@GSS-1987: Yeah, I think that we should do that. Hopefully this article will eventually be moved back to the mainspace when it is ready. RileyBugz^{Yell at me} | _Edits 15:11, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein  08:42, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

• Draftify as an AfC submission, with guidance on how to submit for review. If the author (who seemed desperate for the opportunity for improvement at first, but hasn't touched it in two weeks) can't find sources to establish notability in six months it can be deleted as abandoned. TimothyJosephWood 14:30, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.