Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Golaghat Gymkhana: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 04:59, 10 January 2017

Golaghat Gymkhana

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

Non-notable club. Virtually zero hits on the search engines (except to the club's own website, and a single trivial mention on Books). Current sourcing consists solely of the trivial mention. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:40, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose because Wikipedia is not based on # of search engine hits. The page has been updated with sources and it shows that the place has been mentioned in various travel journals, including this artcile in The Telegraph (an Indian national broadsheet newspaper). The current page in its structure is a credible Wikipedia article. AnjanBorah (talk) 01:40, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as clear A7 and G11 material and it's clear this is a miseuse of our policies as advertising, any article that cares to mention "amenities and services for people" is advertising. SwisterTwister talk 03:35, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as the material in its present form contains objective facts - all citing sources thus, cannot be ruled as advertising! It may be improved further, but I had edited the page to keep it neutral as much as possible. Sorry, but the page informs about a historical building that has been featured in national newspapers, so advertising claim doesn't hold true. Only one line about a few of the facilities and that is again with sources, so that doesn't suggest or emphasise any pleasantness or attractiveness of the place or amenities and services for people. AnjanBorah (talk) 14:11, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additional source, one of them is this article in Himal Southasian published by the not-for-profit The Southasia Trust from Nepal. Not advertising, as clearly the points cite sources. AnjanBorah (talk) 04:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 11:02, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:48, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 23:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 23:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on the sources - particularly, the substantial The Telegraph article, recorded entry to the travel portals (additional sources), besides the mention in the book Quit India Movement In Assam to pass WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Rex86 (talk) 02:46, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. Wikipedia is not a travel guide or free advertising. One Telegraph article is totally inadequate. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:20, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Seems like a non-notable travel-industry business. Toddst1 (talk) 04:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 *'''Delete''' as clear A7 and G11 material and it's clear this is a miseuse of our policies as advertising, any article that cares to mention "amenities and services for people" is advertising. [[User:SwisterTwister|<font color="green">'''S'''wister'''T'''wister</font>]] [[User talk:SwisterTwister|<font color="green">talk</font>]] 03:35, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 **'''Keep''' as the material in its present form contains objective facts - all citing sources thus, cannot be ruled as advertising! It may be improved further, but I had edited the page to keep it neutral as much as possible. Sorry, but the page informs about a historical building that has been featured in national newspapers, so advertising claim doesn't hold true. Only one line about a few of the facilities and that is again with sources, so that doesn't suggest or emphasise any ''pleasantness or attractiveness of the place'' or ''amenities and services for people.'' [[User:AnjanBorah|AnjanBorah]] ([[User talk:AnjanBorah|talk]]) 14:11, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
+::*Additional source, one of them [http://himalmag.com/assams-subaltern-ruse/ is this article in ''Himal Southasian'' published by the not-for-profit ''The Southasia Trust'' from Nepal]. Not advertising, as clearly the points cite sources. [[User:AnjanBorah|AnjanBorah]] ([[User talk:AnjanBorah|talk]]) 04:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />
 <small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Timotheus Canens|T. Canens]] ([[User talk:Timotheus Canens|talk]]) 11:02, 9 January 2017 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --><noinclude>[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|Golaghat Gymkhana]]</noinclude></div><!-- Please add new comments below this line -->
@@ Line 18: / Line 19: @@
 *'''Strong delete'''. Wikipedia is not a travel guide or free advertising. One ''Telegraph'' article is totally inadequate. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 03:20, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
-*Additional source, one of them [http://himalmag.com/assams-subaltern-ruse/ is this article in ''Himal Southasian'' published by the not-for-profit ''The Southasia Trust'' from Nepal]. Not advertising, as clearly the points cite sources. [[User:AnjanBorah|AnjanBorah]] ([[User talk:AnjanBorah|talk]]) 04:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 *'''Delete:'''  Seems like a non-notable travel-industry business.  [[User:Toddst1|Toddst1]] <small>([[User talk: Toddst1|talk]])</small> 04:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)