Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abhigya Anand


 * 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. czar 02:27, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Abhigya Anand

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable child astrologer with YouTube videos; sources weak at best. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  02:00, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 02:35, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I agree the few sources do not meet with WP:RS and it was careless error from my side for contributing to this article. Abishe (talk) 07:08, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * weak delete There do seem to be a number of sources, at least some of which might class as RS. But there is an issue of wp:notnews here. It seems only a few have pickled this up, all recently and all related to one "prediction", which coupled with the credulity shown by some of the sources makes me look at this as just a silly season story with no lasting impact.Slatersteven (talk) 10:45, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete totally unreliable fringe material.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:SENSATIONAL coverage of the YouTube "prediction", if it persists, may garner a line at list of Internet phenomena, but without in-depth coverage of the individual, we can't construct an objective BLP. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are so may astrologers that it is remarkable more did not guess there would be a pandemic. Guy (help!) 23:00, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:PRODIGY and WP:SENSATION. jps (talk) 14:22, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete it seems to have failed proper notability imo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.83.23 (talk) 05:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete it seems to have failed proper notability imo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:4000:11C0:F5F7:45CB:EAFA:7F2E:3864 (talk) 06:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete in this case, just because it quacks, doesn't make it a duck. --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:17, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and above non notable astrologer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I am in shock that Wikipedia has allowed these articles to be created like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.81.220 (talk) 15:50, 7 June 2020 (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.