Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chandni Mistry


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 06:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Chandni Mistry

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this article about a local councillor; there is additional local coverage from the same newspapers already referenced, but no additional national coverage. She was a councillor for less than a year, was investigated for electoral fraud but no action was taken, and she was nominated for, but did not win, an award. She is a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, but I don't believe that contributes to notability (see brief discussion from 2011 here). I do not think she meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NPOL. Tacyarg (talk) 08:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Women,  and United Kingdom. Tacyarg (talk) 08:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


 * This wikipedia page has already been granted a B class Wikipedia status as defined The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. This therefore is relevant page and is particularly important given that this page represents the youngest BAME councillor in the history of the city. This seems like a malicious second attempt to request deletion of the wikipedia as the country falls into a general election. All aspects of the wikipedia page have been properly referenced as approved by various sources. With reference to Royal Society of Arts, the individual is listed on their pages. Handedits (talk) 11:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, regarding your use of the word "malicious" to describe my deletion proposal. I reject this. I have no conflict of interest regarding this councillor or the article about her. I'm not sure what you mean by second attempt, but if you mean the AFC decline in November, that was another person. I have not opened a previous deletion discussion about this article. Tacyarg (talk) 12:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete - local councillors do not meet WP:NPOL so notability would need to be established thorough WP:GNG. There is coverage in local papers but no significant coverage beyond that.  BBC coverage is about the controversy over residency which at best makes this WP:1E. -- Whpq (talk) 13:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Not much to establish notability. An article that doesn't meet WP:NPOL. WP:ROUTINE and WP:MILL at a low level though may be in the future. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 00:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not fulfill NPOL and not enough coverage to meet GNG. Charcoal feather (talk) 00:46, 4 June 2024 (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.