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

Rameez Shaikh

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

WP:TOOSOON for student filmmaker with one short film that has received awards at minor film festivals. Does not pass WP:GNG in my view Atlantic306 (talk) 00:00, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Shellwood (talk) 00:03, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom, no SIGCOV and the only claim to notability is the short film. Also, there might be a potential COI. HurricaneZeta^C 03:00, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jasuben Pizza

AfDs for this article:

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

Jasuben Pizza appears to be a small local business whose coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources is limited and not sustained over time. Most coverage dates back to a handful of news articles around 2013, and there is no recent independent reporting or in-depth analysis to demonstrate broader significance or enduring notability. Some claims in the article are unverified or anecdotal. Under Wikipedia’s notability policies for organizations/businesses, the topic does not convincingly meet the threshold for a standalone article; therefore it should be proposed for deletion. OrigamiSoft (talk) 16:37, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Gujarat. Shellwood (talk) 19:10, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:46, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There are not too many modern news sources, however, Google books show significant coverage in reliable publications such as this. Orientls (talk) 15:10, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I can see the argument for !Keep in the first deletion discussion, but at this point WP:SUSTAINED would come into play. It received its 10 seconds of fame (even an article in The Wall Street Journal), but very little since that time.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:18, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mukesh Tripathi

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

Not yet notable per WP:NACTOR or WP:BIO. Only minor roles so far, and a WP:BEFORE search turned up only interviews and the usual WP:NEWSORGINDIA puff pieces, with no significant secondary coverage in reliable sources.

This article was created by blocked sockpuppets, and more appear to have piled in before it could be db-G5'd, but better to take the article to AFD in any case, as it will just get recreated otherwise. This attempt was created at Mukesh Tripathi (actor) for some reason. Wikishovel (talk) 14:03, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Wikishovel (talk) 14:03, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete typical puff sources, not actually that notable ✾✾ 🙞 quái hoa 🙝 (talk) (contribs) ✾✾ 14:52, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:NACTOR. Svartner (talk) 18:23, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — the three credited appearances are non-significant, and WP:NACTOR requires multiple substantial and clearly identifiable roles to meet the SNG.. EmilyR34 (talk) 04:57, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nagendra K. Ujjani

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

Fails Significant coverage. Pizza on Pineapple ^{(Let's eat🍕)} 07:56, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. Pizza on Pineapple ^{(Let's eat🍕)} 07:56, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nagendra K. Ujjani is a recognized film editor in the Kannada film industry, having worked on notable films such as Nathicharami (2018), which won the National Film Award for Best Editing. His work has been covered in several articles by major media outlets such as [example link] and [another source]. This indicates his contribution to the field and meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for people in the arts. Anjukkanju777 (talk) 08:02, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not insult everyone else by using AI to write this. Is he really so non-notable that you couldn't even replace [example link] and [another source]? aesurias (talk) 09:45, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nagendra K. Ujjani’s work on Nathicharami (2018), for which he won the National Film Award for Best Editing, makes him a notable figure in the Indian film industry. His recognition by the National Film Awards, one of the highest honors in Indian cinema, satisfies Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for professionals in the arts. 66th National Film Awards National Film Award for Best Editing. Anjukkanju777 (talk) 08:10, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, cited award seems to lock it in. Hyperbolick (talk) 09:24, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The award contributes to notability, but most of the sources are about that one award (from 2018) and the few left about Ujjani himself are promotional fluff pieces -- for example this one from an unreliable source reading "For a bold controversial topic like transgenders, it indeed needed the expert hand of Nagendra K. Ujjani to tell viewers how long or short a particular shot should be in order to maximize the sympathy factor for transgenders. The cuts in the movie in any sequence or shot, in particular, are totally mesmerizing." aesurias (talk) 09:39, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the National Film Award for Best Editing looks like the Indian equivalent to the American Academy Award for Best Film Editing. And as such, meets WP:ANYBIO criterion 1: The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor. Admittedly I didn't find a huge amount of significant coverage so as to write anything more than this stub, but the article can be grown in the future. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 09:40, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:52, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — agree with SunloungerFrog. The National Film Award is a major, nationally conferred honour, and under WP:ANYBIO criterion 1 such awards are generally sufficient to establish notability. EmilyR34 (talk) 05:03, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tanisha Singh

AfDs for this article:

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

Still not yet notable per WP:NACTOR, WP:ENT, WP:BIO. Last AFD was in 2019 (so probably not eligible for speedy G4), but a WP:BEFORE search in English and Hindi returns nothing new, and I can find no acting, dancing, modelling or singing appearances newer than 2017. This latest attempt was created at Tanisha Singh (Dancer) for some reason. Some sockpuppet creation history, but that's pretty old too. Wikishovel (talk) 11:25, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Dance, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Wikishovel (talk) 11:25, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 18:24, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No notability to be seen aesurias (talk) 23:07, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — the sources are routine announcements and do not meet WP:GNG, and there are no significant roles to support a WP:NACTOR claim. EmilyR34 (talk) 05:14, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trio (soft drink)

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

Lacks independent coverage. Svartner (talk) 07:48, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Products, India, and Tamil Nadu. Svartner (talk) 07:48, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shrikanth Molangiri

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

Only 5 professional appearances [1] [2] (316 min) and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 07:18, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, India, and Maharashtra. Svartner (talk) 07:18, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:29, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:32, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ammadam

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

Unsourced since creation in 2006. Tagged for original research since 2010. Fails WP:GNG / WP:GEOLAND.4meter4 (talk) 04:10, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 04:10, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 07:31, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - villages are generally ok for notability per WP:GEOLAND. On Google Books we find many sources indicating the use of Ammadam as address. There is/was an Ammadam Post Office, an Ammadam Match Company, an Ammadam Regional Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. (could be same as the Ammadam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd?), an Ammadam St Antony's Church and so forth. Subject of study on fauna. Presumably the village was merged into the grama panchayat only after independence. --Soman (talk) 10:41, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tarini (Marathi TV series)

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

Procedural nomination. Article was created as a redirect by an editor now blocked for sockpuppetry, and has been widely edited by IPs/temp accounts. Multiple editors have edit-warred to keep this article as a redirect on the grounds of lack of notability. Per WP:BLAR, once a redirecting was objected to, AfD would be the next step, not edit-warring. This was listed at WP:RFPP as a request to protect the page as a redirect; I have chosen instead to restore the article and list it at AfD so the community can determine if it is notable and if it should be kept, deleted, or restored to a redirect. As this is a procedural nomination, I have no opinion on whether or not this article should be deleted. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:35, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:35, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - To the original series Jagaddhatri (TV series). The AfD is the correct route so thank you, The Bushranger. This program is one of many remakes of the original with editors putting up a WALLEDGARDEN in an attempt to show notability but notability is not inherent. There are a lot of sources shown but they are all churnalism based on promotion from Zee TV. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:52, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1986 Indian Air Force Antonov An-32 disappearance

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

The article is not notable WP:Notability because it lacks sufficient coverage in reliable secondary sources WP:Reliable sources. Only one source is functional, and the other is dead (404). Therefore, the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for events and should be considered for deletion. Yousuf31 (talk) 19:44, 20 August 2025 (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/2025 August 20. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:03, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:25, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:25, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:25, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:26, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oman-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:27, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 22:30, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Antonov An-32#Accidents and incidents which already has a brief description of the accident. Our deletion policy says to first consider alternatives to deletion before nominating an article for deletions. The Rredirection subsection states "A page can be blanked and redirected if there is a suitable page to redirect to, and if the resulting redirect is not inappropriate." --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 22:58, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Antonov An-32#Accidents and incidents – Per A.B. Svartner (talk) 23:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The additional sourcing posted below gets this one across the mark for notability. nf utvol (talk) 11:38, 26 August 2025 (UTC) Redirect as noted above. Acceptable ATD in this case. Also, as a note to the nominator, just being a stub is absolutely not a valid reason for deletion. nf utvol (talk) 00:19, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But it doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability... Yousuf31 (talk) 08:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes... But one of your stated deletion reasons was "because it's a stub" and that is in no way related to its notability. nf utvol (talk) 12:40, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is sustain coverage of this disappearance after 1986. We can add the sustain coverage to the article. Here are some sources:

https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/chandigarh/indian-air-force-aircraft-missing-indian-ocean-9606370/

https://fighterjetsworld.com/air/third-indian-air-force-antonov-an-32-aircraft-disappeared-in-last-33-years/14494/

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/missing-iaf-plane-all-you-need-to-know-about-the-an-32-aircraft-331016-2016-07-24

https://www.livefistdefence.com/the-lost-the-found-a-tale-of-two-indian-antonovs/

https://www.thequint.com/news/india/previous-incidents-of-an-32-goes-missing

https://www.firstpost.com/india/missing-iaf-aircraft-brings-back-memories-of-2016-1986-incidents-when-an-32-wreckage-was-never-found-age-old-fleet-awaits-overhauling-6751171.htm Zaptain United (talk) 17:18, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the other source in the article was in 2014 so that is a secondary source. There are more secondary sources talking about the disappearance years after 1986 than when it first disappeared. Zaptain United (talk) 17:21, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Indian Express article goes into great detail on this disappearance in 2024 despite no investigation ever being conducted on this disappearance or any long-term search. Zaptain United (talk) 17:23, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I edited it Yousuf31 (talk) 14:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Analysis of sources presented:

Source assessment table
Source	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/chandigarh/indian-air-force-aircraft-missing-indian-ocean-9606370/			✔ Yes
https://fighterjetsworld.com/air/third-indian-air-force-antonov-an-32-aircraft-disappeared-in-last-33-years/14494/	Per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 368#fighterjetsworld.com.		✘ No
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/missing-iaf-plane-all-you-need-to-know-about-the-an-32-aircraft-331016-2016-07-24		Only briefly mentioned.	✘ No
https://www.livefistdefence.com/the-lost-the-found-a-tale-of-two-indian-antonovs/		Only a short mention.	✘ No
https://www.thequint.com/news/india/previous-incidents-of-an-32-goes-missing#read-more		Short paragraph that doesn’t go into further details other than a retelling of the disappearance.	✘ No
https://www.firstpost.com/india/missing-iaf-aircraft-brings-back-memories-of-2016-1986-incidents-when-an-32-wreckage-was-never-found-age-old-fleet-awaits-overhauling-6751171.htm		Short mention of the disappearance.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

We have one notability-establishing source, but per WP:GNG, we need multiple reliable independent sources that provide significant coverage of the event, and as of yet, there’s only one. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 19:14, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.firstpost.com/india/missing-iaf-aircraft-brings-back-memories-of-2016-1986-incidents-when-an-32-wreckage-was-never-found-age-old-fleet-awaits-overhauling-6751171.html here is the link for firstpost. Zaptain United (talk) 20:07, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is the link that works. Zaptain United (talk) 20:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the working link, I've amended the assessment. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 20:31, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://web.archive.org/web/20160716045112/http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories3291_MH370_Rekindling_Memories_IAF_AN-32.htm

How about this source? It is used in the article itself. I think this is sustain coverage. Zaptain United (talk) 00:22, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Could you check if this source is good? Zaptain United (talk) 02:21, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The source is pretty in-depth and appears to be reliable (and it appears to have been written by Vinod Bhatia). So all in all, there are now two sources that count towards WP:GNG. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:33, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. Given other sources found. I can add the following 2

* the incident is mentioned in a list here https://thefederal.com/category/states/west/gujarat/gujarat-7-major-air-crashes-ahmedabad-boeing-accident-191620 .

* Also in this book https://www.google.se/books/edition/Without_a_Trace_1970_2016/UBOWDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=1986,+an+Antonov+An-32&pg=PT165&printsec=frontcover Dualpendel (talk) 12:00, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

None of those establish notability. Wikipedia prefers reliable and secondary sources with editorial oversight. Yousuf31 (talk) 09:23, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not a notable incident. Apart from some initial reports and minor mentions, it has ultimately failed to meet WP:LASTING. Orientls (talk) 16:38, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable as incident. Captain AmericanBurger1775 (talk) 07:18, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Antonov An-32#Accidents and incidents per WP:ATD. Fails WP:NEVENT but we can cover it at this other page.4meter4 (talk) 22:33, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But isn't there sustain coverage. We have at least 2 sources that have sustain coverage that are published decades after the disappearance. One of the source authors is written by Vinod Bhatia who is a famous Indian Air Force Officer. How does this article not have sustain coverage when even a famous officer who was awarded the Vir Chakra award wrote about it.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160716045112/http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories3291_MH370_Rekindling_Memories_IAF_AN-32.htm

https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/chandigarh/indian-air-force-aircraft-missing-indian-ocean-9606370/ Zaptain United (talk) 02:37, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it has passed the threshold. That said, even if more material were to be found it's better to cover these together per WP:NOPAGE. Editorially we really don't need to cover this in a separate page.4meter4 (talk) 15:14, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Antonov An-32#Accidents and incidents: as an AtD. No evidence has been presented of reliable-source SIGCOV of this incident; instead we have WP:SPS and unbylined WP:NEWSORGINDIA coverage. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:11, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopened and relisted following a "redirect" closure and discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2025 November 22.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:05, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, Aviation, Oman, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per WP:TNT. It would need a significant improvement to be encyclopedic, even if notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:52, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Two WP:GNG-establishing sources exist, fulfilling WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:INDEPTH ([3] [4]). As an expansion is a viable solution, WP:TNT does not apply since the article is not "hopelessly irreparable" (being a stub). Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:55, 3 December 2025 (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/2025 December 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:39, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

7/G Rainbow Colony 2

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

Unreleased film, production company does not have article. The main reason for deletion is that the film was never released and there has been no update on whether this film has completed shooting or not. Also, there is no clarity regarding the language(s) of the film, if it is really a bilingual.

Due to all of this lack of information, it is best to draftify until there is clarity to expand the article. There has been no updates in regards to trailer or song release. See WP:NFF.

I would go as far to say that even a Sequel section on the 7/G Rainbow Colony article is warranted. DareshMohan (talk) 05:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify: Not hearing too much on the project. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:45, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:15, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – Per above. Svartner (talk) 10:32, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pax Indica

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

The term is barely mentioned in the sources (mostly in source 2 with a passing mention in source 1) and the article appears to be WP:OR in that it is combining three disparate periods into an overarching theme. If the Varghese and Sangeeth book is notable, then perhaps an article on the book is warranted, but this article looks like original research. RegentsPark (comment) 17:33, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator, as there is essentially no scholarship that treats these three disparate, although similarly named, topics as part of the whole. We already have articles for two out of three. Split the Pax Mughalica part into a separate article. Convert this article into a four-way WP:DAB, including the Pax Indica (book). Викидим (talk) 17:36, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pax Mughalica barely had any expanding factor as per my research. Hence doesn't warrant its own article. ScrubbedSoap (talk) 18:22, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would support also turning Pax Mughalica into a redirect to a section in Mughal empire. Викидим (talk) 16:38, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:08, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also why aren't Zac Sangeeth considered "notable"? ScrubbedSoap (talk) 18:25, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Articles like Pax Gupta, Pax Mughalica themselves don't have any expanding factors and hence will be very short.

Infact if you will see the Pax Gupta article now, it's very short. Hence I thought it would be better if they were clubbed together. (Also Pax Sinica exists).

I think it can be considered fair if you want them seperate, but remember these articles if separate will be very small.

Anyways, Pax Indica

1 -being used for Kushan Empire
2 -being used for Mauryan Empire
3 -being used for Gupta Empire
4 -being used for period of Mauryan and Gupta
5 -being used for Mauryan, Gupta and Kushan.
6 - being used for Islamic Period.

ScrubbedSoap (talk) 18:37, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These citations contain only passing mentions of pax indica and often it is mentioned only once. What you need is several academic sources that discuss pax indica as an overarching term for various empires-empires that, presumably, maintained peace on the Indian subcontinent. RegentsPark (comment) 20:31, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have that, except one that is mentioned in the article.

But all these "Pax" Kushan/Gupta/Mughal

Are all related to peace in the Indian subcontinent only.

I am okay with this article (Pax Indica) serving as a disambiguation page.

But I still stand that these Pax Gupta, Pax Mughalica don't have enough material for themselves to be stand out as an article. ScrubbedSoap (talk) 04:21, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:23, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- additional searches have yet to show enough SIGCOV to this topic, though searches on the Google books do see it bein mentioned more.Lorraine Crane (talk) 20:05, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St. Joseph's Central School and Junior College, Mundakayam

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

Redirect to Mundakayam#Education, where it is listed, under WP:ATD-R. Fails in WP:NSCHOOL as well as GNG owing to no RS having a SIGCOV. My BEFORE turned up database listings and social media handles. BhikhariInformer (talk) 12:36, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Kerala. BhikhariInformer (talk) 12:36, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as suggested, which is reasonable. If not redirected, it risks being deleted due to nonsensical information like climate in the classrooms. Bearian (talk) 04:30, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect-agree with the redirect suggest to Mundakayam#Education to increase context to redirect target, additional searches show lack of SIGCOV to suggest standalone notability.Lorraine Crane (talk) 21:15, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

L. E. F. Eden Garden Matriculation School

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

Redirect to List of educational institutions in Salem, India, where it is listed under WP:ATD-R. Fails in WP:NSCHOOL as well as GNG. My BEFORE yielded only database listings. There are no RS having any CORPDEPTH. BhikhariInformer (talk) 11:48, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Tamil Nadu. BhikhariInformer (talk) 11:48, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jammu (Occupied by Pakistan)

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

This article is basically a WP:POVFORK of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. If there is any historically worthy material in here, it can go into either that page or the individidual district pages. Kautilya3 (talk) 09:51, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Politics, Pakistan, India, and Jammu and Kashmir. Kautilya3 (talk) 09:51, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To address concerns raised above:

1. This article is not a POV fork.

Jammu Province is a historically distinct administrative division of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, consistently documented in reliable sources (Drew 1875; Lydekker 1883; Imperial Gazetteer 1909; Lawrence 1895).

It is not covered in depth under Azad Jammu and Kashmir, which describes a modern political entity, not the historic Jammu Province.

2. Title issues do not justify deletion.

Per WP:ATD and WP:MOVE, if the title is considered non-neutral, it should be moved.

Title disputes are not a deletion rationale.

3. The page is being actively improved.

I am revising wording for full neutrality and adding inline citations from established academic works already used on related Wikipedia pages.

4. Content is verifiable and non-original.

All statements are based on long-standing historical sources and existing district-level Wikipedia pages (Mirpur, Kotli, Bhimber).

This is not new analysis; it is a summary of published classifications of Jammu Province.

Given these points, the appropriate action is Keep (or, if needed, rename), not deletion. RYasmeen12 (talk) 17:40, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete A10. Mccapra (talk) 10:15, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The topic is notable, historically defined, and supported by multiple reliable, published sources. The article is not a POV fork; it documents a historically verifiable sub-region of the former princely state of Jammu & Kashmir whose distinct administrative, linguistic, and cultural identity is well-established in the literature.

1. Historically verifiable administrative unit (WP:RS / WP:V).

Multiple colonial administrative works explicitly classify Mirpur, Bhimber, and Kotli as part of the Jammu Province, not the Kashmir Valley:

Drew, The Jummoo and Kashmir Territories (1875)

Lawrence, The Valley of Kashmir (1895)

Imperial Gazetteer of India (1909)

These are widely used scholarly references across South Asian historical research. The article relies on these precise, verifiable sources.

2. Linguistic distinctiveness (WP:NOR and WP:RS).

G. A. Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India, Vol. 9, Part 4 classifies the vernacular spoken in Mirpur/Bhimber/Kotli within the Western Pahari/Lahnda group, not the Kashmiri (Dardic) group. This is a published, secondary source demonstrating that the region is linguistically distinct and historically treated as a separate cultural unit.

3. Contemporary academic usage (WP:V).

Modern scholarship on the British Pahari-speaking diaspora (e.g., Hussain 2015, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development) explicitly treats Mirpur/Bhimber/Kotli as a culturally and linguistically distinct Jammu-origin region. This shows continuing use of the distinction in peer-reviewed literature.

4. The article is not a POV fork (addressing WP:POVFORK).

A POV fork occurs when content is duplicated to advance a viewpoint. This article does not duplicate existing content. It covers:

A historically recognised administrative division (Jammu Province)

Districts currently administered by Pakistan

Their distinct linguistic, cultural, and historical identity

These topics are not covered in Azad Kashmir, which predominantly focuses on the political entity formed in 1947. Historical Jammu Province material would not be appropriate to insert there.

5. Consistency with Wikipedia’s existing naming conventions (WP:NPOV / WP:CONSISTENCY).

Wikipedia already includes neutrally documented titles such as:

Indian-occupied Kashmir

Pakistan-occupied Kashmir

Tibet (occupied by China)

Baltistan (occupied by Pakistan)

The title here follows the same descriptive pattern used for historically distinct territories under current administration. This is not more POV than existing occupation-based titles.

6. Improved sourcing directly addresses concerns.

The article has been updated with citations from:

Drew (1875)

Lawrence (1895, 1909)

Grierson (1916)

Imperial Gazetteer (1909)

Modern peer-reviewed diaspora research

This resolves the earlier concern of insufficient sourcing. The content relies on established historical geography and linguistics, not opinion.

7. Neutral and factual framing (WP:NPOV).

The article does not assert political claims about sovereignty. It describes:

historical province boundaries

linguistic classification

cultural identity

the fact of current administration by Pakistan

This matches the neutral, descriptive approach taken by comparable Wikipedia articles.

For these reasons, the article meets Wikipedia’s criteria for notability, verifiability, and historical neutrality, and therefore should be kept RYasmeen12 (talk) 00:05, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the article Azad Jammu and Kashmir is a general encylopedic coverage of the region. Whereas a significant portion of this article is specifically about its socio-political functioning. My reasoning is per WP:CONSPLIT Kvinnen (talk) 10:40, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Really? A huge section called "Azad Jammu & Kashmir - a misnomer by Pakistan"? How is that better than the Azad Kashmir#Name section? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:11, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Azad Jammu Kashmir per nomination. This is clearly a POV fork, but it should be redirected rather than deleted so any sources or other encyclopedic material can be added to the target article, if there are any valuable contributions that can be saved. Katzrockso (talk) 12:05, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to AJK or delete. POV fork. If anything worth inclusion is there it should be added to AJK. UnpetitproleX (talk) 14:32, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, oppose redirect. GPTZero states that the section "Azad Jammu & Kashmir - a misnomer by Pakistan" was AI generated with 98% probability. References "Proclamation of Azad Government Distributed in Western Jammu Districts" and "Linguistic Survey of India, Vol. 8: Indo-Aryan Family, North-Western Group" link to archive.org, but when I click on them, I get an "Item cannot be found" error. Kelob2678 (talk) 17:56, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Try this link: https://archive.org/details/dli.pahar.2036/page/n995/mode/2up RYasmeen12 (talk) 22:46, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistic Survey Of India Vol 9 Part 4 Pahari Languages RYasmeen12 (talk) 22:47, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect this effectively unsourced page to Azad Kashmir and use reliable sources to explain any issues there. It is unclear why editors above are proposing redirecting this page to pages that are themselves redirects. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:22, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and oppose redirect. Wikipedia does not decide the ownership of any of the disputed territories, nor, therefore, who "occupies" any of it. This is a PoV title, supporting one side of the dispute, whereas we should remain strictly neutral. - Arjayay (talk) 21:54, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Arjayay: But Indian occupied Kashmir exists, as does Pakistan occupied Kashmir. Both are redirects. This redirect would not be any more POV than those. If we were to treat this redirect as absolutely unacceptable then those would be so as well. Courtesy ping @Kelob2678, UmbyUmbreon, and Athanelar: also. UnpetitproleX (talk) 12:08, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the question is whether the term is used widely in reliable sources. Also, even that being the case, then the better redirect would be the more natural sounding "Pakistan-occupied Jammu" rather than "Jammu (occupied by Pakistan)", not least because the formwr implies "that part of Jammu which is part of Pakistan" and the latter implies that Jammu in its entirety is 'occupied by Pakistan' which is obviously not true Athanelar (talk) 12:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Athanelar - I've obviously heard of PoK and IoK quite frequently, but never Jammu (Occupied by Pakistan), moreover, that is an awkward phrase. If you want to reword it, I could agree to a redirect, provided we balance it with a similar redirect for a reworded Jammu (Occupied by India). WP:NPOV is the first of the three Wikipedia:Core content policies. Arjayay (talk) 13:11, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the comment. The reason the title uses “Jammu (Occupied by Pakistan)” rather than “Pakistan-occupied Jammu” is historical accuracy.

Before 1947, the districts of Mirpur, Kotli, Bhimber, and Poonch were part of the Jammu Province of the princely state of Jammu & Kashmir under the Dogra (Singh) dynasty. These districts were historically identified as Jammu, not an entity called “Pakistan-occupied Jammu”.

The events of 25 November 1947 relate specifically to the entry of Pakistan-backed forces into the western Jammu districts. In historical writing, this is described as the occupation of the Jammu region’s western districts by Pakistan, not “Jammu created by Pakistan”.

Thus, the phrasing:

“Jammu (Occupied by Pakistan)”

accurately reflects:

1. The pre-existing territorial unit (Jammu Province)

2. The direction of occupation (Pakistan entering Jammu territory)

3. The wording used in diaspora, human rights, and some academic discussions

This is consistent with how Wikipedia titles are constructed when the occupied entity existed prior to the occupation (e.g., Baltistan (occupied by Pakistan) in scholarly literature; Tibet (occupied by China) used commonly in academic discourse).

If the community prefers a different phrasing, I am open to a move discussion, but the historical basis for “Jammu (Occupied by Pakistan)” is clear and not an invention. RYasmeen12 (talk) 17:48, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want AI-generated content to be preserved in any way. LLM bludgeoning by the creator in this thread convinces me further. Kelob2678 (talk) 18:07, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the concern raised about “AI-generated content”: the underlying ideas, sources, structure, and historical content were developed by me as a human editor. English is not my first language, and at times I use automated tools for assistance with grammar or phrasing. However, the content itself—including the sourcing, historical distinctions, administrative classifications, linguistic references, and diaspora research—is based entirely on verifiable publications and my own editorial work with those sources.

Using a tool to refine wording is not equivalent to generating content, nor does it undermine the validity of the sources cited. Wikipedia’s policies (e.g., WP:AGF and WP:V) evaluate the verifiability of information, not how polished a sentence appears. All citations provided in the article are drawn from reliable, published works (Drew 1875; Lawrence 1895; Grierson 1916; Gazetteer 1909; Hussain 2015, etc.), and every factual claim is grounded in these sources.

In short: grammar assistance does not create content; it only helps present content more clearly. The substance of the article is human-curated, fully sourced, and verifiable. RYasmeen12 (talk) 00:07, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a POVFORK per nominator and Oppose redirect. As above, the title given to this article is not from a neutral POV, and should not be retained. When I first saw it in recent changes, I thought it was move vandalism to begin with. - Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 03:30, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, my intention here is to document the historical and linguistic classification of the Mirpur–Bhimber–Kotli region as described in long-standing reliable sources such as Drew (1875), Lydekker (1883), Lawrence (1895), and the Imperial Gazetteer. These sources consistently treat the area as part of the Jammu Province, distinct from the Kashmir Valley. The article summarises this published scholarship and does not advocate a political position.

I recognise concerns about phrasing in the title and I am open to participating in a move discussion if the community feels a different wording would be more consistent with existing naming conventions. However, the underlying topic is verifiable and documented across the literature, and the article itself presents the material neutrally. RYasmeen12 (talk) 00:12, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and oppose redirect. I also thought this was move vandalism when I spotted it in RC. The title is blatantly partisan. Athanelar (talk) 03:42, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose deletion.

This article summarises well-documented academic facts about the historic Jammu Province of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir.

Multiple scholarly sources (Drew 1875; Lydekker 1883; Imperial Gazetteer 1909; Lawrence 1895; Snedden 2013) place Mirpur, Kotli and Bhimber within Jammu Province, not the Kashmir Valley. These districts later became part of Pakistan-administered territory after 1947, but their historical classification is consistent across over 150 years of published literature.

This topic is not original research. It is based on the following verifiable sources already used across Wikipedia:

– Mirpur District

– Kotli District

– Bhimber District

– Dogra dynasty

– Jammu and Kashmir (princely state)

This article simply summarises those existing facts in one place.

I am currently updating the language to ensure full neutrality and encyclopaedic tone, and adding additional citations from published academic sources.

For these reasons, the article meets Wikipedia’s verifiability and notability standards and should not be deleted. RYasmeen12 (talk) 17:34, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete First to the creator, please stop bludgeoning this AfD with LLM cruft. I see no original (non-LLM) comment or event a hint at understanding the issues raised. The same goes for the LLM content in the article. That it is a POVFORK can be gauged from the fact that the much more broader and neutrally titled Pakistan-administered Kashmir is a redirect per consensus. No strong opinions on whether this (and corollary for all sides) should exist as rds, contrary to comments above POV rds are well in line with enwiki guidelines. Gotitbro (talk) 00:36, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comment. I would like to address the points raised with reference to Wikipedia policy.

1. “LLM cruft”

If there are specific diffs indicating non-human or non-compliant content, please identify them. Wikipedia requires evidence-based concerns (WP:V, WP:RS, WP:BURDEN). No such evidence has been provided.

2. Neutrality / POVFORK

For an article to be a POV fork, it must duplicate existing content in order to promote a particular viewpoint (WP:POVFORK). This article does not duplicate Pakistan-administered Kashmir. That article covers Muzaffarabad, Neelum, Bagh, Haveli, etc., and does not describe the historical Jammu Province districts (Mirpur, Bhimber, Kotli, Sudhanoti) as a distinct pre-1947 administrative region.

This article addresses a different historical unit — the Jammu Province districts west of the LoC — as documented in reliable sources (Drew 1875; Lydekker 1883; Census of India; Gazetteers). Therefore, it is not a fork but a topic with verifiable historical boundaries.

3. Verifiability and Sources

All statements in the article are supported by published academic or historical sources (WP:RS). These include 19th-century surveyors, census records, and contemporary South Asian scholarship. If any statement requires further citation, I am happy to add it.

4. No personal or political agenda

My edits follow WP:NPOV and the purpose of the encyclopaedia — summarising reliably published knowledge. The pre-1947 administrative structure of the Jammu Province is a matter of historical record, not opinion.

In summary, no policy-based rationale for deletion has been demonstrated. I am continuing to improve the article’s tone and citation density to meet all Wikipedia content standards. RYasmeen12 (talk) 19:08, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the pre-1947 administrative structure of the Jammu province is a historical fact. But its relevance to today's world is an opinion. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:53, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. I would like to summarise the key points that demonstrate why the article Jammu (Occupied by Pakistan) meets Wikipedia’s standards for inclusion:

1. The article covers a historically documented region

The “Jammu Province” existed as an administrative division of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir from 1846 until 1947. This is supported by multiple reliable, non-controversial sources including Drew (1875), Lydekker (1883), the Census of India, and contemporary historical scholarship.

The article summarises these facts already verified in established literature.

2. It does not duplicate existing articles

Unlike “Pakistan-administered Kashmir” or “Azad Jammu and Kashmir,” which describe the modern political entity, this article documents the historical Jammu Province and its specific districts (Mirpur, Bhimber, Kotli, Sudhanoti).

These areas are ethnographically and linguistically distinct from the Kashmir Valley, and this distinction is repeatedly noted in reliable sources.

3. It is grounded in verifiable pre-1947 history, not political opinion

The content relies on published academic works, archival materials, and neutral historical accounts.

The focus is on factual mislabelling and the absence of a consolidated history of the western districts of old Jammu Province — not on any contemporary political claim.

4. The Treaty of Amritsar (1846) itself reinforces the article’s legitimacy

As participants have noted, the treaty formalises the creation of the Dogra-ruled princely state and demonstrates the administrative coherence of Jammu Province under the Dogra dynasty until 1947.

This directly supports the historical framing of the article.

5. No significant policy-based reason for deletion has been demonstrated

Notability is satisfied through multiple independent scholarly sources.

Verifiability is satisfied through citations already in the article.

Concerns raised so far relate to personal interpretation rather than policy.

For these reasons, the article aligns with Wikipedia’s requirements on verifiability, notability, neutrality, and scope, and should be retained. RYasmeen12 (talk) 01:17, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nuruddin Sameer

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

Only 3 professional appearances [5] and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 06:20, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, India, Maharashtra, Punjab, and Uttar Pradesh. Svartner (talk) 06:20, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:01, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:04, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -lack of enough SIGCOV even with additional searches to suggest notability.Lorraine Crane (talk) 23:16, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shinu (footballer)

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

Only 4 professional appearances [6] [7] (206 min), and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 06:16, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, India, Karnataka, and Kerala. Svartner (talk) 06:16, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, was prematurely written and career never panned out. Geschichte (talk) 07:31, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:01, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:03, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Basant Singh

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

Completely fails in WP:GNG, even on databases lacks information. Svartner (talk) 06:09, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, India, and Punjab. Svartner (talk) 06:09, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:01, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:03, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - one possibly unreliable citation is not enough for a BLP. Ping me if you find and add three better sources. Bearian (talk) 04:26, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vanlalruatfela Thlacheu

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

Only 13 professional appearances [8] [9] (930 min) and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 06:05, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, India, and Mizoram. Svartner (talk) 06:05, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:01, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:03, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - two citations are not enough for a BLP. Ping me if you find and add one or more better sources. Bearian (talk) 04:26, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Costa (footballer)

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

Trouble finding any mentions of him outside databases. Some other high school players seem to be coming up about as often as him, database-wise. aaronneallucas (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and India. aaronneallucas (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 23:59, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Goa-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:16, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Quite common name, hard to look up. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:28, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 15:22, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 15:27, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rohan Raje

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

I have only found one source about him having opened a cricket academy. I have not been able to find any other sources of note beyond databases or routine game coverage. Raje does not appear to meet the notability guidelines. aaronneallucas (talk) 20:17, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and India. aaronneallucas (talk) 20:17, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:02, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect if there's a possible target. Vestrian24Bio 08:07, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article is a stub, which is quite acceptable, but it was badly written. It's now been rewritten, and an extra source has been added. I'm concerned to read "if there's a possible target" when there is an obvious one called List of Mumbai cricketers, in which Raje is included. Frankly, this is a bad nomination. The article didn't need deletion or redirection. It simply needed to be rewritten. It is now ready for development. Jack (talk) 22:57, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still not seeing the room for improvement expected here. The only thing that's happened is that two links to databases have now been swapped out for a link to a different database, with some other additional information not supported by any links to significant coverage. aaronneallucas (talk) 01:12, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain, giving examples, what you mean by the room for improvement expected here. If you think the subject fails GNG, say why in specific terms. As for how he IS notable, the fact that he had an eleven-year career in top-class cricket playing for two undeniably top-class teams counts for something, I would say. Then, he established a cricket academy which is certainly worthy of note, especially as it was reported by a quality newspaper like the Hindustan Times. The article is a perfectly acceptable WP:STUB with plenty of potential, especially if his academy becomes successful. Jack (talk) 10:50, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If playing for such teams creates notability, he should easily appear in sources. A single source about him opening a cricket academy is nothing special, and we certainly can't justify keeping this article by fortune-telling the success of this academy. The fact that we haven't heard anything more about it in years already discounts that as a reason.

And, additionally, I'm not the one suggesting the article can see improvement; you are. I don't think there is any room for improvement, which is why I didn't give examples. aaronneallucas (talk) 01:14, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've just entered "Rohan Raje" into Google, and it's produced a list of cricket references as long as my arm. It looks as if your idea of WP:BEFORE is limited to finding pieces about the academy, and not what he is actually notable for—playing top-class cricket. If and when someone decides to expand the article from stub-class to start-class, they'll have all these Google finds to help them, not to mention the many books and other offline media that cover Indian cricket, especially the IPL. Until then, the article is a legitimate WP:STUB. Jack (talk) 04:17, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide links to these references. I'm finding lots of databases, but that makes nothing towards establishing notability. We need reliable, secondary sources with significant coverage, and at least a few of them. Databases are routine sports coverage, as well as many articles which mention this cricketer. aaronneallucas (talk) 05:26, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:DILIGENCE. Jack (talk) 11:26, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take that as you not having found any either. aaronneallucas (talk) 16:31, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm beginning to see WP:IDHT in your responses. The onus is on you. Jack (talk) 23:18, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Clearly lacks WP:SIGCOV, even on the Telugu article. Svartner (talk) 10:35, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, delete, and nothing but delete, eh? Bearing in mind that we have List of Mumbai cricketers in which this gentleman's name is included, perhaps you should read WP:ATD-R. Jack (talk) 10:55, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, with a comment: I have a hard time believing that a cricketer with Indian Premier League experience ISN'T notable. That said, you wouldn't know it by a three-sentence article. I'm willing to work on it (even though it's out of my normal cricketing realm and I've just came back from a hiatus), but I don't want to be the "only" person saving it. From experience, I know that saving an article alone takes a lot out of someone. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 00:31, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JustJamie820 I'm more than willing to help expand an article, but I really need sources to do that. I can't find any beyond routine game coverage or one reference of his academy. If I had, I would have expanded the article rather than nominating it for deletion. If you find some sources you can share them (place them on the article talk page and ping me) and I'll happily help expand. I just don't think that's possible with the sources available. aaronneallucas (talk) 05:30, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Aplucas0703: Thanks for the information and interest. One of the things I've found with editing, after I learned how User:Lugnuts ruined stubs and short cricket articles for all of us, is that I don't know what "routine" game coverage is, and possibly I don't know why it's such a "no-no" for people. To me, any game coverage beyond a mention in a scorecard, like the four matches on his ESPNcricinfo page where he is hyperlinked in their articles, is not "routine". It's not "superlative" either, but it's something noteworthy, for good or for bad reasons. For a cricketer with only 36 major matches, you take the noteworthiness where you can.

Anyway, if I mention sources here first (which might not happen as I have the bones for a new version of the article almost done in Notepad on my computer (only the lead and final paragraph need work) and they may show up in the mainspace beforehand because anything's better than what there is right now), can you let me know somewhere what you've found that is considered "routine"? This is a genuine, "I don't know the answer" question from me, not anything snarky. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 06:38, 3 December 2025 (UTC) (Sorry if this resembled sound and fury saying nothing...)[reply]

@JustJamie820 To me, coverage is routine when the point of the article was to cover the game, not the person. It's not that these are impermissible in a Wikipedia article, but that they don't establish notability. If this were the case, my local high school basketball team would qualify for Wikipedia pages (and they should not). Routine game coverage, like announcing scores, is expected for a news organization to do for nearly all teams big and small, and people who are both significant and not significant are expected to be reported on.

Articles that are routine coverage would be like [10][11][12]. They are narrative accounts of a game, and don't show much significance as to the person themselves. While I don't want to share the name of the student, looking up my local high school basketball team's star player from a year ago turns up plenty of score reports and even news articles that mention his name! Some even are even short articles about his commitments to university. Following the same criteria, he would get a Wikipedia article! That's why routine coverage is not seen as "significant".

I hope this gives some of my insight on this issue. aaronneallucas (talk) 07:24, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Aplucas0703: Thanks for clarifying your views of the term. I think I always assumed (and probably still might even after this) that such coverage was okay if a player meets other notability criteria. WP:OFFCRIC lists the Indian Premier League as a noteworthy league, and while I disagree with some-to-many of the views of what is official and what isn't (more leagues need to be official, personally, especially for women's cricket), I think you'd be considered crazy to think that the IPL isn't notable these days. Anyway, I figured that league notability carried into its players, like it seems to do in American sports. That's all. By the way, I think I'm using one of your routine coverage links. Forgive me if it shows up again when I publish the draft in the next 24 hours. Routine or not, it is important to show that he's not truly "retired". -- JustJamie820 (talk) 07:43, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JustJamie820 I think they're perfectly fine to use if the person meets notability requirements. However, I don't believe that notability carries over. Generally speaking, notability is not considered "inherited" by being part of something notable. I don't know that notability carries over in American sports, either, rather just that we have a lot of articles that haven't been deleted that really should be. aaronneallucas (talk) 16:29, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have "presumed notability" anymore, WP:OFFICIALCRICKET should probably be updated to match WP:NCRIC, which says cricketers who have played at the highest domestic level or in the lower levels of international cricket may have sufficient coverage about them to justify an article, but it should not be assumed to exist without further proof. I would expect someone who played for MI in IPL for 2 seasons would most likely have coverage about them, but unless this is actually demonstrated, it's hard to justify a keep. Has anyone checked foreign language sources e.g. Hindi and Marathi (which I believe are the 2 most common languages in Mumbai)? Joseph2302 (talk) 16:35, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a brand-new article on Raje. It does use a bit of CI and CA, so forgive me on that front. But it's a lot better looking. I just hope it's good enough to avoid deletion. *crosses fingers* -- JustJamie820 (talk) 23:05, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's very good, Jamie, and I've promoted it to C-class. Well done. Jack (talk) 23:17, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ayisha Abdul Basith

AfDs for this article:

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

Page deletion stands; subject doesn't meet WP:SINGER or WP:GNG TheWikiholic (talk) 17:04, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, United Arab Emirates, and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:06, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:33, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
with all respect, I think the citations added from Reliable sources. then is it need to be deleted? Thanks in advance ~2025-37348-07 (talk) 03:41, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:SINGER. I doubt WP:COI as well. AlphaCore talk 20:44, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
there's no chance for WP:COI. in which portion it fails WP:SINGER ~2025-37665-85 (talk) 09:12, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a paid article; check the deleted versions for a previous COI version created by a now-blocked editor. Drmies (talk) 17:01, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of schools, colleges and universities in Bokaro

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

All the information on this page is already present at Bokaro Steel City#Education. This page provides nothing new except a college name - Bokaro Steel City College. I don't think it makes any sense to have a separate List for just 6 schools, that have been easily accommodated in the Education section of a larger article. And although WP:CHEAP, a redirect or merge doesn't appear to be useful here. BhikhariInformer (talk) 07:15, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Jharkhand. BhikhariInformer (talk) 07:15, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 09:34, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Bokaro Steel City#Education – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 05:30, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Haryana State Akali Dal

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

Unsourced since 2005. Fails WP:ORG / WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 19:58, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and India. 4meter4 (talk) 19:58, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Haryana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:15, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as does not pass WP:NORG. Mccapra (talk) 22:04, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the same sources available when the article was created are no longer available online. However, [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22] and [23] indicate that this was the state-level unit of Sarb Hind Shiromani Akali Dal, and should be merged there. Some other potential refs [24], [25]. --Soman (talk) 09:17, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would support a merge to Sarb Hind Shiromani Akali Dal.4meter4 (talk) 14:47, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of international cricket centuries at the Green Park Stadium

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

Same reasons as e.g. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket centuries at Arun Jaitley Stadium, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket centuries at Dubai International Cricket Stadium, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket centuries at the Gabba and many others. WP:NOTSTATS, not notable as a group. Fram (talk) 16:12, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket, Lists, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Fram (talk) 16:12, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is a featured list. However, this doesn't mean that it is notable. Kelob2678 (talk) 16:36, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per WP:NOTSTATS. A list is only of use if it incorporates some meaningful narrative in, say, a "notes" column. While the individual players are notable, lists of this type do not have any notable value. They'd be okay on CricketArchive, but not here. Jack (talk) 11:54, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per WP:NOTSTATS and previous AfDs. Vestrian24Bio 08:45, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTSTATS and per other AfD's. These stats can be quite easily found at ESPNCricinfo. Ajf773 (talk) 09:27, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence this meets WP:NLIST because it's just a WP:NOTSTATS list (rather than having sources about the group as a whole). Just because it's a FL doesn't make it notable- especially as the current state would fail FL anyway due to unsourced text. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:06, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Explurger

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

Much time having been wasted over this whole affair, I won't bore you by repeating the details. Sources are press release after press release of the most SERIESA/WP:CORPROUTINE content you'll find.

Extended content

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?
"Social media travel app 'Explurger' with AI-based features launched, here's what it does". HT Tech. 2020-08-15. Retrieved 2025-10-08.		–	WP:CORPROUTINE launch, minimal analysis.
"Actor Sonu Sood Wants To 'Make People Addicted In A Good Way' With His Social Media App Explurger". Outlook Business. 2022-06-10. Retrieved 2025-10-08.	Content is interview answers
"Explurger secures $4.5 million in Series-A funding led by Affle". The Times of India. 2024-02-15. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 2025-10-08.			RSNOI applies, this is fairly routine churn of funding round press materials
Release, ANI Press (2022-07-15). "Sonu Sood's fans invite 11 crore people on Explurger". Archived from the original on 16 October 2022. Retrieved 2025-10-08.	This is, at least, clearly marked, as shown by the author
Team, DNA Web. "Sonu Sood launches his new social media app, Explurger: Know its key features". DNA India. Retrieved 2025-10-10.			Again, very minimal content beyond the launch announcement
"Building Better: Founders, Futures, and the Power of Vision". ET Now. 4 August 2025. Retrieved 2025-10-09.		Listicle from Bizz Impact, no evidence of reputation (No ET Now Journalists are involved in creation of this article)
Roy, Kumar Shankar (2021-12-08). "Social media app Explurger raises $1 million funding". BusinessLine. Retrieved 2025-10-08.			Quotes from funding announcement again
"Explurger raises $4.5 million in funding round led by Affle". The Economic Times. 2024-02-14. ISSN 0013-0389. Retrieved 2025-10-08.			Honestly, you see the funding round article once, you see them all.
"Explurger Answers PM Modi's Call for Homegrown Innovation in Social Media". The Wire. Retrieved 2025-10-08.	No idea what the letters "P" and "R" here could stand for. Totally. None at all.
Rest of it is also pretty much press release, press release, press release. At least some of them, like Tribune, are marked.

Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:43, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Software, and India. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:43, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. Wikishovel (talk) 10:00, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. Wikishovel (talk) 10:00, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : I was leaning towards "weak keep" as the sourcing was only slightly unsatisfactory, but upon examining the collapsed content, I agree with the proposer than the sources of this article are not of an acceptable quality. Kvinnen • dispatch an owl 11:33, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don’t really see a valid reason to delete, because the subject meets WP:GNG, and it is a service not a company so we can apply WP:NORG but only through WP:PRODUCT, and for software programs, GNG is the relevant notability criteria; also there are enough reliable sources covering this topic in details, including 1, 2, 3 and more, but the article has promotional content that needs cleanup. Pasados (talk) 16:51, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's very interesting. Do you have time to talk about it now? Alpha3031 (t • c) 21:11, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am seriously asking this question, and I do not retract it. I would consider it good form to explain why you think two funding announcements and a launch announcement are anything but routine coverage, which is covered under both Wikipedia:Notability § Common circumstances and the subject specific listing of such circumstances, WP:CORPROUTINE. I will revise my assessment given an appropriate answer, but I do need an answer from you. Alpha3031 (t • c) 22:20, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that not all third-party sources are reliable. It's very common for companies at this stage to make press releases and funding announcements. In many cases, these announcements are made via PR firms that they contract. These sources are not independent and cannot count towards notability. Please be more careful going forward. HyperAccelerated (talk) 20:58, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The CEO of the company doesn't seem particularly noteworthy on his own, but the company appears to have enough to WP:NCORP. Svartner (talk) 21:47, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You have provided no justification for why we should listen to you. HyperAccelerated (talk) 20:59, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I did a WP: BEFORE and could only find routine coverage. You know it's bad when the top Keep !vote claims that they found quality sources that will save the article, and they all fall into WP: CORPROUTINE. HyperAccelerated (talk) 20:56, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paanch Minar

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

A film that just released recently and that fails to show WP:NFILM or GNG with SIGCOV. Htanaungg (talk) 08:44, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Htanaungg (talk) 08:44, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources are reliable. What else made you think to nominate it for deletion. Jayanthkumar123 (talk) 09:10, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is whether this film meets any of the notability criteria outlined in WP:NFO. Htanaungg (talk) 09:15, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The film has received more than enough reviews from notable newspapers. [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35]. Manick22 (talk) 09:13, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I assume good faith regarding the sources I cannot read, but I have no way of knowing whether those sources are reliable. In addition, even if they are reliable, the question of whether the subject meets either the GNG or WP:NFO remains. Htanaungg (talk) 09:19, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you have doubts about the reliability of the sources, you can discuss it here at ICTF. For Generally used sources. Manick22 (talk) 09:32, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, Indian film articles only use two or three reviews to establish notability. This film has received more than two reviews, so it passes the general notability guidelines. You can also use the translate option in your browser. I'm not Telugu either, but I can read it using the translate feature. Manick22 (talk) 09:50, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The reviews listed above are more than enough to show that the GNG is very clearly passed. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 09:16, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do many website links mean that all of them are reliable? Htanaungg (talk) 09:24, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: All the sources and reviews are reliable. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:24, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy/SNOW keep. Yet another instance of an Indian film getting deleted by a non-Indian editor. Most of Manick22's reviews if not all are reliable. See [36]. DareshMohan (talk) 19:39, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Source 8 is listed as a RS (green) and gives a review. We have two others, source 7 is red (a non-RS), source 6 isn't indexed by Cite Highlighter (the colours I reference), but even with two reviews, that's more than enough to show notability. Oaktree b (talk) 01:30, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — the film has been reviewed by multiple notable news websites and satisfies the criteria at WP:NFILM. EmilyR34 (talk) 05:45, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James Singh Sargolsem

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

Absolutely no significant coverage or notability in any sources beyond passing or fully trivial information or routine game coverage. aaronneallucas (talk) 04:01, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 04:35, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Sports, Football, and India. I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 04:57, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Assam-related deletion discussions. Svartner (talk) 06:19, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 21:33, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 21:39, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - essentially an unsourced BLP. The burden is on anybody trying to find sources. Bearian (talk) 02:54, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gurpanthjeet Singh

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

Absolutely no significant coverage or notability in any sources beyond passing or fully trivial information or routine game coverage. aaronneallucas (talk) 04:02, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 04:29, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Sports, Football, and India. I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 04:56, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Punjab-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:17, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 21:33, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 21:39, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - two references to the same website are not anywhere near sufficient for a BLP. Bearian (talk) 02:55, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

H. Lalbiakthanga

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

Only 13 professional appearances and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 04:52, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, India, and Mizoram. Svartner (talk) 04:52, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 21:33, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 21:40, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suraj Mandal (footballer)

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

I can find no evidence of this footballers notability. He is largely confined to passing mentions, including one of the article's sources. He has no mention in the other source used in the article. Searches online turned up nothing except that he had been suspended. Not enough to build an article on. [37] aaronneallucas (talk) 01:45, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, India, and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:50, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 02:22, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 21:33, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 21:38, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

South Asia Peace Initiatives

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

No indication of notability per WP:ORG. A WP:BEFORE search turned up a lot of coverage from Unification Church sources like the Universal Peace Foundation, and the usual social media, but no significant coverage in reliable, indepedent sources. Best I could find was an article about the Prime Minister of Nepal speaking at a SAPI-sponsored event [38], but the group is only mentioned in passing, in article about his speech. Wikishovel (talk) 16:33, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Religion, Nepal, and India. Wikishovel (talk) 16:33, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails to meet WP:NCORP. Poor sources that are mostly 404 error. No secondary independent reliable sources with significant coverage on the organization to pass notability. RangersRus (talk) 13:21, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:46, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Damania

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

I was unable to verify this. Might be better to turn this into a disambiguation page rather than an article on a family. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 13:40, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. 4meter4 (talk) 13:40, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Convert Per MOS:DABNAME, at worst, if the text cannot be sourced, convert to either a name holder on a dab page or anthroponymy list for the current content at Damania § Notable persons.—Bagumba (talk) 07:59, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Daman, India. No sources and coverage to keep this page as a stand-alone article. Fails WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 13:14, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In its current state, that redirect would be a {{R to article without mention}} —Bagumba (talk) 15:50, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We also have four people with the surname Damania, so a convert to MOS:DABNAME page is preferable over a redirect to Daman, India.4meter4 (talk) 15:56, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Setindexify/Keep there are four people with this in the title. I will get to work on this soon since bold fixes are allowed even while an AFD is ongoing. The name itself is not suitable for a standalone. ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 17:08, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:4meter4 I have setindexified the page. Since no one has yet supported deletion and you endorsed conversion to a set index above, you can just withdraw this if desired and we can all be on our way. ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 17:14, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect. Transformation into a WP:SETINDEX would be the equivalent to deleting the primary topic (the family). As such, a community discussion following the mandated AFD seven day discussion protocol is not optional. We need to follow the AFD process even if an WP:ATD is a likely outcome. It's good to know there is growing support for a set index because that would be a good outcome.4meter4 (talk) 17:19, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:4meter4, conversion to a set index does not require an AFD, or even a talk page discussion. Indeed even outright redirection can be done boldly. I do both without a second thought. Challenges can discussed informally on article talk pages too, though formal discussion may still be needed to resolve deadlocks. WP:BEFORE C(1) is quite explicit that AFD is not needed for these cases, again up to and including an outright WP:BLAR. Perhaps that is slightly proceduralist, and maybe there is a reason to deviate from normal procedure here, but I do not see it. ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 17:30, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we are here now. I see no need to truncate the process. It doesn't hurt to allow for a few more days of discussion. That way nobody can cry fowl, and we won't have to come back here if someone objects.4meter4 (talk) 17:44, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:4meter4 if this is your preference I will not press the procedural point. However I will not stand in the way of someone who does either. ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 17:47, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY, The IP rewrote the article, and now it is a standard article on the surname with four entries. Kelob2678 (talk) 19:49, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:45, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Radhika Bhide

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Reality show contestant (not winner), nothing charting, and nothing seen for touring or released under major record label. CNMall41 (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 06:29, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CNMall41 (talk) 06:35, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:57, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to share my side as the person who started the article.

I don’t have any connection with Radhika Bhide — no paid work, no personal link. I just help some independent artists with their online visibility for free sometimes.

Regarding notability:

Even though she is not the winner of the show, she has received a lot of independent media coverage recently. Her performances on I-Popstar (Season 1) went viral, and multiple well-known outlets covered her songs and interviews: Maharashtra Times, NDTV Marathi, Loksatta, Lokmat, Saam TV, ABP Majha, Lokshahi News, JustShowBiz, etc. These are all organic, non-sponsored articles.

She may not have charted or been signed to a major label yet, but the amount of independent coverage she has received suggests she meets general notability, not just the musician-specific criteria. If anything needs fixing or cleanup, I’m happy to work on it. Aditya Jagdhane (talk) 07:04, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If she has not charted or released music under a major label, how would she pass WP:NMUSICIAN? As far as the COI, you were asked about that on your talk page. If we can continue the conversation there it would better as this page is a discussion about notability, not editor conduct. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:04, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: she earned some Marathi language news coverage to support WP:GNG but is it sufficient for inclusion in English Wikipedia? A matter of concern here to be addressed by some experienced editors. SaTnamZIN (talk) 05:39, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: An analysis of the sources in Marathi would help.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 21:55, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Source 2, won't translate via Google Translate, but it has many instagram posts, so I"m assuming it's not an extensive source. Source 8 says it was written by AI when I translate it, so, that's no good. I'm going withe a !delete unless we can get better sources. Oaktree b (talk) 01:12, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

D2h

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

This was previously merged into Dish TV (and subsequently the redirect was edit-warred substantially). An account with one edit made a new article from the redirect without justification. All the independent sources are covering either the merge of the two companies or Direct-to-home television in general. There's also a promotional tone, and I don't think there's anything here worth merging. I'd like to restore the redirect. lp0 on fire () 18:59, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. lp0 on fire () 18:59, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - History is not inherited, not to mention edit wars are likely to continue if the article stays up. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 19:53, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:02, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The brand still exists and has independent infrastructure. Sufficient time should be given for this article to improve. ~2025-34769-95 (talk) 01:10, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:28, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Dish TV – There is already a section in the article, just necessary to incorporate the sources and some of the content. Svartner (talk) 21:52, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the risk of an edit war, also protect the redirect after the merge. Svartner (talk) 21:53, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It's clear that this article won't be Kept but the question is whether or not this discussion will close with a Merge. If you want this page returned to Redirect status, the article doesn't have to be deleted first, we can just close it and redirect the page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:18, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Liz. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 23:05, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Heaven Premier League

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

Not enough coverage on independent reliable sources other than the WP:ROUTINE coverage to justify WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio 11:06, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Cricket, and India. Vestrian24Bio 11:06, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:10, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing really notable here seems to be its collapse. I'm not sure that really justifies keeping the article, and I would tend towards delete. Perhaps at a later stage we might be able to see some form of lasting legacy, for example if laws are changed to limit the ways that leagues such as this can be run. But right now it's super-close to the event and I'm not convinced that there is any lasting legacy or real notability. I suppose that there might be a case for listing it at List of Twenty20 cricket competitions#India, but I'm not even convinced about that Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:10, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect To List of Twenty20 cricket competitions #India where this is mentioned at target per WP:CHEAP, WP:BLAR and WP:ATD. Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:56, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above. -𝘼𝓷𝓳𝓪𝓷𝓐 𝙇𝓪𝓻𝙠𝓐 ^{𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨} 11:47, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect To List of Twenty20 cricket competitions #India as per viable WP:ATD. Fade258 (talk) 13:26, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The Indian Heaven Premier League meets WP:GNG through multiple independent, reliable sources providing significant, in-depth coverage of both its operational phase and subsequent collapse, rather than mere routine announcements; pre-event reports detail official preparations, including the Divisional Commissioner's review meeting for infrastructure, security, and crowd management expecting 25,000–30,000 spectators at Bakshi Stadium, alongside directives for strict online ticketing to ensure transparency and accessibility [39] [40], while mid-tournament match coverage confirms actual play, such as Chris Gayle's 54 off 42 balls [41]; post-collapse analysis in established outlets substantiates lasting notability under WP:NEVENT, with Economic Times outlining the organizers' abrupt cancellation midway through the 12-match schedule, stranding 70 players, umpires, and staff at the Radisson Collection Hotel over unpaid bills exceeding 5 million rupees and leading to negotiations for release [42], Al Jazeera tracing the timeline from the October 25 opener to the November 1 vanishing by Punjab-based Yuva Society amid sponsorship shortfalls and low attendance tied to local harvest seasons, including British High Commission mediation for affected internationals [43], BBC reporting police registration of a cheating case with interviews from Parvez Rasool on management lapses disheartening local talent and Mellissa Juniper on unpaid participation fees and hotel dues totaling around 5 million rupees [44], and Outlook (Indian magazine) highlighting the stranding of stars including Gayle, Devon Smith, Jesse Ryder, and Shakib Al Hasan at the hotel, raising oversight questions on venue approvals for an inexperienced organizer [45]; this body of secondary sourcing—spanning event setup, execution, and fallout with legal, economic, and regional implications—establishes the topic's standalone encyclopedic value beyond a list entry, particularly as the controversy prompts inquiries into sports event governance in Jammu and Kashmir; while recency warrants caution per WP:TOOSOON, the depth and multiplicity of coverage indicate enduring interest. I am not much aware whether article creator should participate in AfD process or not, but I thought I should add my vote here. Thanks. - Arbaz Thakur (talk) 17:22, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:42, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:22, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:36, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anjana Larka, @Blue Square Thing, @Fade258, @Servite et contribuere, @Vestrian24Bio, @Wcquidditch, could you please evaluate @Arbaz Thakur's sources and indicate whether you stand by your assessment? Sandstein 07:38, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 1 & 2 doesn't help with notablity, having pre-event reports and 30k spectators has become usual in India and is not a notable something.
Ref 3 - per NOTINHERITED, featuring/stranding notable players and their involvement doesn't make the event notable.
Ref 4, 5, 6, 7 - First, having a report on BBC or Outlook alone doesn't make it notable. Although there's a coverage it doesn't seem to be LASTING enough.

Maybe if there's a LONGLASTING coverage in the future then maybe it could be re-created, but for now its a case of TOOSOON, so I'll stand by my assessment as "Delete". Vestrian24Bio 10:53, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The initial coverage of the league may have been routine, and the league itself might not have seemed notable. However, the collapse has generated significant coverage in independent media, including international media BBC] and Al Jazeera . An FIR has been registered, and we may also see lasting effects . By this standard, the subject seems to meets WP:GNG and is supported by reliable sources. Reducing it to a bare redirect would not be a good idea, I therefore change my vote to Keep. -𝘼𝓷𝓳𝓪𝓷𝓐 𝙇𝓪𝓻𝙠𝓐 ^{𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨} 08:50, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Especially given the league's collapse it seems there is more than enough independent coverage to warrant an article. RunningOnBrains^(talk) 04:00, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Koshur Anchar (via WP:PROD on 22 March 2025)

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]