Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Censorship in Kashmir


 * 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The result was withdrawn. I appreciate the hard work that has gone into improving the article and am now satisified that notability has been met. -- Tavix ( talk ) 22:57, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Censorship in Kashmir

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Tagged with a notability concern since 2012. The article doesn't describe censorship in Kashmir in general, rather a single event from 2010 that doesn't seem to have significance long-term, failing WP:NOTNEWS. -- Tavix ( talk ) 23:04, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:13, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep There is no point in deleting this article because this is a serious issue and it is properly referenced. If someone is interested in editing it further, they should be allowed to do it. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 05:26, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think it's clear that this topic meets the general notability criterion that the topic should have been the subject of significant independent coverage. At the moment, the inline references in the article focus on particular media blackouts, but a look at scholar.google.com shows that there's a wider academic discussion of censorship in Kashmir too. I've added Censorship in Kashmir to evidence this. It would be easy to add extra news reports on individual episodes of censorship, but I hope the academic bibliography is enough to show notability. Alarichall (talk) 22:17, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per arguments above. The referencing is sound. MidwestSalamander (talk) 23:33, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: I agree that this topic meets general notability criterion. - Ret.Prof (talk) 14:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. The text has been improved since the nomination. Just as there are many articles ceated many years ago that get proposed for deletion, so we have tags that are many years old and no longer serve their purpose. On the basis of improvements, the contested article passes WP:GNG. -The Gnome (talk) 18:52, 31 March 2019 (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.