Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1521 in India


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

The result was   keep. This should be a editing issue, not an AfD one. Black Kite (talk) 23:35, 4 June 2013 (UTC) 
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. This should be a editing issue, not an AfD one. Black Kite (talk) 23:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

1521 in India

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no scope for improvement and finding reference better to remove all articles in 1500 series and create a new one like 1500-1600 In India if necessary. Benedictdilton (talk) 17:45, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 May 25.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  17:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - This should be a joint nomination of all related articles. What a mess. Carrite (talk) 18:30, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Neutral Please combine this nomination into one entry, it should not take this many places on the daily log.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 19:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep all per WP:ATD. The claims of the nomination seem too speculative and merger would be more in accordance with our editing policy. Warden (talk) 21:24, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Sir  Rcsprinter,  Bt  (gas)  @ 22:59, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep some important events are already there, and of course there is room for growth--actually great room for growth, because our coverage of Indian history is still rather sketchy.  DGG ( talk ) 01:52, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge all to 1520s in India. There is not likely to be enough content for annual categories at such a remote period.  Peterkingiron (talk) 11:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are a dozen similar (yet unbundled) articles at AfD with varying consensus. Bundling was specifically requested at the 1521 AfD. (AfDs: 1500, 1501, 1502, 1503, 1504, 1505, 1506, 1507, 1508, 1509, 1510, 1511, 1512, 1513, 1514, 1515, 1516, 1517, 1518, 1519, 1520, 1521, 1522, 1523, 1524, 1525, 1526, 1526, 1527, 1528, ...) Not sure if an admin would be willing to combine the lot for the nom (or how that process would go) but no one has argued to consider these noms separately, nor to decide them separately. I recommend moving discussion to the first AfD (1500 in India) for the time being. czar   &middot;   &middot;  16:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Article has potential for development, similar to 1938 in Scotland. Rayabhari (talk) 14:36, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.