Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 Indian stock market crash


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

The result was delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:06, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

2015 Indian stock market crash

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Redudnant, unsourced. Kernosky talk2me! 09:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not meet GNG. Normal ebb and flow of the market. Completely unsourced. Already covered in the BSE SENSEX article. Possible Speedy delete A10 as does not expand on topic already covered. Cowlibob (talk) 12:01, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment An article being unsourced should not be nominated for deletion using that rationale. Article could be improved and sourced. AusLondonder (talk) 18:24, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. AusLondonder (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Found sparse sources. Those sources appeared to be trigger-happy sources (unreliable) who jump on every market movement, trying to be the "first". I sincerely doubt it is notable. Jcmcc (Talk) 19:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per . — CutestPenguinHangout 13:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * My vote depends on one question; are there reliable sources we can cite to verify the article's content? After all, this article may be worth keeping, but there needs to be reliable sources to verify the information.--OfficerAPC (talk) 00:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of refs to verify the content but being unsourced was not the only reason this was nominated.[], [], []. In fact I've just noticed the entire article is a copyvio of this NDTV profit source,[] so have rewritten it with this edit. []. Cowlibob (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Question - is there enough information to include in the article that it could grow beyond a stub? If not it may be better merged, as suggested above.Jonpatterns (talk) 18:51, 7 September 2015 (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.