Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bandesha


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Bandesha

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seems to fail WP:GNG. PROD was reverted by some years ago but there was no explanation for doing so. It is certainly a last name but I have struggled for years to find reliable sources that discuss it as a Jat clan. Sitush (talk) 12:05, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete This subject totally and utterly lacks notability. Lovelylinda1980 (talk) 12:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete--This does insignificantly mention it to be a Jat clan but the main thrust is on it's usage as a last name.Sparse hits in Raj-era-references are located but must be discounted on concerns of reliability.Nothing else. &#x222F; WBG converse 04:23, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * --?? &#x222F; WBG converse 04:31, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * When I decline a prod, I sometimes mean  that I think the article should   stay in WP, but more often, just that that it needs discussion or a ry at  better sourcing. In this  particular case, I declined it in 2013, when the article was . It had sources--I gather that those working in the area consider the sources unreliable and have removed them. I have disagreed with this,   and I continue to disagree with this, but the consensus appears to have been otherwise. I think it any case it needs a search for sources by those qualified to do so.  DGG ( talk ) 05:35, 14 September 2018 (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.