Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bahu Lao, Beti Bachao


 * 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. NorthAmerica1000 03:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Bahu Lao, Beti Bachao

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:CRYSTAL. Anupmehra - Let's talk!  09:35, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  09:36, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.  Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  09:36, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - User has given reference for Bahu Lao, Beti Bachao events organised by VHP. I think this article should exist as there are similar existing artilces on religion like Love Jihad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.193.132.14 (talk) 10:37, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Leaning keep - Lots of coverage. See this search.  JT dale Talk ~ 11:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * -Perhaps, you would like to take a look at WP:GOOGLEHITS. Next, concern is not WP:GNG but WP:CRYSTALBALL that states, "Wikipedia doesn't speculate future". WP:RUNOFTHEMILL may also be relevant here. Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  17:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * - If you bothered to actually go to my search, you'd see it is not a normal google search so WP:GOOGLEHITS does not apply. It is a Google News search, listing an enormous amount of media coverage on this subject. Also WP:CRYSTAL says Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation. Wikipedia does not predict the future. All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred.. This clearly blows your argument out of the water, since this event is not speculation that it may exist, it's a confirmed upcoming program verified by many media outlets. Really, I'd recommend you follow WP:BEFORE in future. In addition, please do not accuse editors of vandalism without any proof.  JT dale Talk ~ 05:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * -I'm not sure how my previous post accuse you of being "WP:VANDAL". Yes, upcoming campaign, -said to happen sometime next year. It doesn't exist as of now, -said to happen. Most news-worthy events do not qualify for inclusion. Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  08:54, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I am not referring to me. I'm not quite sure if your being oblivious or really don't know what I mean every time I post.  JT dale Talk ~ 09:07, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You should have been specific, that's a WP:DUCK case. I've not opened a SPI by now, is just because it is the single instance. I hope, they wont repeat it. Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  10:10, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - I don't think it is WP:CRYSTAL as there is no speculation in the post - please refer references from independent media who have no interest in speculating. It is also not WP:RUNOFTHEMILL - if it is then by same logic any other article can qualify for same. However as I'm the creator of the post, I'll wait for others view also.Vinod 17:55, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, you created the article and when I nominated it for deletion, you removed the tag in this edit. Right? One person actually can !vote only once. So, I've to strike-through your recent keep !vote. See also, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  18:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * - What make you think that I removed the delete tag? Anyone which basic understanding of system audit understanding wouldn't do so. I made upfront declaration about me being the creator of the article and would not want to give up my vote - hence I'm removing your "strike-through". Let other folks see the merit along with my declaration and cast their vote.Vinod 18:44, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Either Keep or Merge with Bajrang Dal. There is certainly a significant amount of coverage so wikipedia should cover this. Am not certain whether it merits a separate article or should be merged. Davewild (talk) 12:24, 4 January 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.