Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Delhi

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Delhi|~~~~}} 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 Delhi. 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 India.

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

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Delhi/archive

watch

Articles for deletion

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The result was Withdrawn. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Manmohan (judge)

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

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

Similar rationale to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Navin Chawla (judge), there's little coverage that would suggest that they pass WP:GNG other than routine coverage of their appointment and cases that they have judged. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, India, and Delhi. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep on a liberal reading of WP:JUDGE which recognizes that a state-wide or province-wide office raises a presumption of notability. Although Delhi is under federal jurisdiction it is the National Capital Territory which we can treat as equivalent to a state or province.
  In that way he is similar to Helen Murrell who is the former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Australian Capital Territory, also not a state but a federal territory. He is unlike Navin Chawla (judge) who is a permanent judge but not chief justice. I offer no opinion on Mr. Chawla's page. Oblivy (talk) 03:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep - chief judge of a federal district (equivalent to the District of Columbia) is probably going to be notable. The current sourcing is not great, but is acceptable; finding reliable sources coming out of India is a fool’s errand. Bearian (talk) 00:59, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Mammohan is the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court not a mere judge like Navin Chawla. Added references below.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:24, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Pharaoh of the Wizards: WP:IBTIMES is not reliable but all others are ok. Thank you for sharing that helped me cast my vote. RangersRus (talk) 19:42, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

References

• Keep. Notable Chief Justice of Delhi High Court from the coverage in somewhat reliable sources. Passes WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 19:40, 24 October 2024 (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.

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 redirect‎ to National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Vishal Singh (politician)

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Vishal Singh (politician)
• Articles for deletion/Vishal Singh (politician) (2nd nomination)

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

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

This is about an insignificant politician who is not elected to any state level, national level and even local level body. He is merely an officeholder in a government organisation. It fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Adamantine123 (talk) 00:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Adamantine123 (talk) 00:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: not elected to any legislative body, fails WP:NPOL TheSlumPanda (talk) 04:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Delhi, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: Meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for WP:NPOLITICIAN, as the subject holds a national-wide office, serving as the Chairman of the National Cooperative Consumers Federation of India (NCCF), the apex body for consumer cooperatives in India. The notability for politicians are not limited to holding legislative positions. WP:NPOL clearly states, "Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels.” National-wide office applies to his role at NCCF. The subject has held a few roles in other cooperative and government bodies in India, some of which are major, including being elected as a Director of NAFED[ref]. The page can be kept. --Vikasudayrajsharma (talk) 11:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: The subject appears to lack notability, having held non-notable roles at organizations of limited prominence. Alternatively, consider a redirect, such as to the National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India. Please see article hist for more information TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India, of which he’s chairman. I’m not sure if anyone will be looking for him under the phrase (politician) in the sense that he’s a party leader, not an elected official, but it’s a good alternative to deletion. Bearian (talk) 02:15, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus here yet. As far as I understand it, "officeholder" in POL means being elected or appointed to a government position, agency or legislative body, not having a position or "office" in a NGO or other organization.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:52, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to the organization: as suggested seems ok. I don't think this is a politician, more of a civil servant. Oaktree b (talk) 23:07, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete and/or redirect. The "national office" criterion in NPOL is referring to legislative offices, like the national legislature, and not to leadership of organizations. Leaders of organizations are permitted articles if they can be sourced well enough to pass WP:GNG, but are not at all "inherently" notable just for existing, and this article is depending far too strongly on primary sources to claim that he would pass GNG. Bearcat (talk) 17:30, 30 October 2024 (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.

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 keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Yoginder Sikand

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

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

Fails WP:GNG, Several articles authored by the subject are frequently cited as references; however, they have yet to receive significant mainstream media coverage (WP:SIGCOV). Jannatulbaqi (talk) 22:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Authors. Jannatulbaqi (talk) 22:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:25, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete no independent sources to establish notability, mainly are self published, fails WP:GNG. TheSlumPanda (talk) 12:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep. I find several reviews of the books [1][2][3][4], also [5] (but I'm not sure of the reliability of the last source). I think it's enough for WP:NAUTHOR. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 14:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Russ Woodroofe: Thank you for bringing to light some of these reviews. Now, each work or book should be the primary subject of multiple independent reviews and these 4 reviews are on different books. Can you find one more additional review for any of the book that you found the reviews for? Then I think, it will pass WP:NAUTHOR criteria. Please ping me if you find an additional review and I will reconsider my vote. RangersRus (talk) 02:45, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

That's not my reading of AUTHOR, but in any case Russ Woodroofe's reviews 1 & 3 above are both of The Origins and Development of the Tablighi-Jamaʿat (1920–2000). A Cross-county Comparative Study. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

NAUTHOR says that a collective body of work should have been the subject of multiple reviews. If it was mainly one work, then I would !vote for a redirect to that work, but I see one book with two reviews, and two other reviewed books. This is just about the minimum that I am looking for in NAUTHOR. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 05:19, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I see 1 & 3 above reviews are on same book. I will change my vote to weak keep because if we remove the sources on the page that are dead and unreliable then these are the only 4 reviews that remain that can be attributed to the page. RangersRus (talk) 10:07, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Weak Keep. All sources on the page are unreliable, dead domains, page not found and non-secondary independent. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NAUTHOR and WP:NBIO. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as writer is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 16:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC) but 4 reliable sources with reviews were found with one work having multiple reviews that makes the author pass WP:NAUTHOR. RangersRus (talk) 10:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
• Comment. Not sure why the rush to delete this. Several of the books look to have healthy citations in GS, and Russ Woodroofe has found multiple reviews. Merely having dead links on the article is not a deletion rationale. Espresso Addict (talk) 07:55, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

  I always make sure to preserve articles and only consider deletion after thorough investigation. I would advise other editors to follow the same approach: take your time, conduct careful research, and then provide your comments. Avoid rushing the process. Thank you--- Jannatulbaqi (talk) 12:39, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be nice to get additional opinions on the book reviews brought to this discussion and whether or not they satisfy WP:NAUTHOR.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:37, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. I've evaluated the reviews brought by Russ Woodroofe and agree they are sufficient to meet AUTHOR. Agree it is unclear whether we can count #5. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
• Comment. Meets WP:NAUTHOR. I changed my vote above after reviews shared by Russ Woodroofe. These 4 reviews will be the only reliable sources if we remove all the unreliable and dead links on the page. More reliable sources will be needed to attribute to the BIO of the author and other areas on the page. This is the only reason I am weakly keeping it. RangersRus (talk) 10:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Withdraw: I am very impressed by the comments and sources provided by 'Professor Russ Woodroofe' and admin 'Espresso Addict'. Therefore, I am withdrawing my nomination. Thank you very much. Jannatulbaqi (talk) 14:09, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you, Prof. @Russ Woodroofe and @Espresso Addict! Jannatulbaqi (talk) 14:10, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

  You can just vote "Withdraw" as nominator of this AFD instead of voting keep. Closer will just close with withdraw conclusion. RangersRus (talk) 14:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

  Done, Thank you @RangersRus! Jannatulbaqi (talk) 14:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

  But note that while TheSlumPanda's delete !vote stands, the AfD can't be closed as withdrawn. (A passing administrator might still close as a keep, as I think that a consensus may have emerged.) Russ Woodroofe (talk) 14:50, 25 October 2024 (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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:40, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Tanieya Khanuja

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

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

Fail GNG. Article creator has been blocked! Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and India. Shellwood (talk) 21:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Delhi. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: only gossip mentions, no reliable source which discuss about the subject in depth, fails WP:GNG. TheSlumPanda (talk) 10:21, 19 October 2024 (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.

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 redirect‎ to Director's Kut Productions. as an ATD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Rajan Shahi

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Rajan Shahi
• Articles for deletion/Rajan Shahi (2nd nomination)

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

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV and notable sources, more like paid pr page. Suspected creation by sockpuppet. Imsaneikigai (talk) 16:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Poor to unreliable sources with no significant coverage on the subject in secondary independent reliable sources. Fails WP:NDIRECTOR and WP:NBIO. RangersRus (talk) 14:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Doesn't qualify for soft-deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to Director's Kut Productions: mentioned there as founder. His credits include notable productions as director but with other directors; and the awards seem to be collective/to the work and not personal. But if other users think it's enough, not fiercely opposed to Keep. Not in favour of deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:02, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect as suggested. Most of his awards were as a producer of “Most Popular show” types, or for longtime productions. It’s unclear whether he just financed the films or had any creative involvement. Bearian (talk) 15:54, 21 October 2024 (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.

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 delete‎. "Keep" !votes are not based on policy or notability guidelines. ✗plicit 02:29, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Fitpass

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

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

Doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT. Tons of sources (too many, see WP:CITEKILL) but they are primary and mostly non-independent. bonadea contributions talk 20:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 21:05, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:21, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Not notable. The 3rd party sources look like advertorials and press release based articles, not real coverage. MLTRock (talk) 16:20, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

KEEP because i have seen the app mentioned in most downloaded apps in india https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-downloaded_Google_Play_applications — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.240.194.224 (talk) 15:20, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Being mentioned in a Wikipedia list article does not mean it's notable, though. --bonadea contributions talk 15:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: Did some checks but couldn't find any more sources. Non-notable. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. --Ratekreel (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

KEEP the article subject is notable, i have seen multiple resources in media, and the app has more than one million downloads on playstore and appstore — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.223.148.55 (talk) 10:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The "KEEP"s carry zero P&G weight, but we don't have quorum to delete yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. We can't write an article purely from WP:ORGTRIV, and that's all there is as far as the eye can see. Alpha3031 (t • c) 00:41, 23 October 2024 (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.