Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chandra Bhandari


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Bishal Shrestha (talk) 03:47, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Chandra Bhandari

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't satisfy WP:POLITICIAN. No significant coverage for his political career or incidents. Fails WP:GNG too. Bishal Shrestha (talk) 10:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator. Passes WP:NPOL Bishal Shrestha (talk) 03:43, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bishal Shrestha (talk) 10:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Bishal Shrestha (talk) 10:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Bishal Shrestha (talk) 10:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Appears to have served in the House of Representatives (Nepal), passing WP:NPOL. See https://myrepublica.nagariknetwork.com/news/30141/?categoryId=81. --Enos733 (talk) 22:03, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Serving in the House of Representatives (Nepal) is a secondary criterion for WP:NPOL. However, I couldn't find any in-depth coverage in multiple sources for him. Doesn't pass WP:BASIC. Bishal Shrestha (talk) 23:30, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * No, serving in a national legislature is not a secondary criterion for NPOL; it's an automatic pass of NPOL #1. Bearcat (talk) 01:12, 3 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep and flag for reference improvement. Serving in a national legislature is a straight pass of WP:NPOL #1. Yes, some improved sourcing is needed, but national legislators are one of the classes of topic that Wikipedia has decided are critically important enough for us to have articles about that so long as we can verify that they actually held the claimed role and aren't a hoax, they keep articles regardless of the state of sourcing present in it. Bearcat (talk) 01:12, 3 September 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.