Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delhi Gymkhana


 * 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 per WP:SNOW (non-admin closure). Clear consensus that reliable sources assert the subject's notability. WilliamH (talk) 13:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Delhi Gymkhana

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete not notable per WP:ORG/WP:CORP. Ave Caesar (talk) 02:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  --Eastmain (talk) 02:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. New references indicate notability. This is a club for the rich and famous, it would appear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eastmain (talk • contribs)
 * The sources lack depth of coverage requiring "multiple independent sources" which are not provided in the article. Two is hardly sufficient. --Ave Caesar (talk) 03:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep The references are good enough for me. This article, in particular, provides a good deal of information and suggests that it's a pretty significant place. Zagalejo^^^ 03:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. The obligatory Google News search for "Delhi Gymkhana" looks quite promising as well as the links already mentioned. Ha! (talk) 03:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. If 116 Google News hits aren't enough then how about 334 Google Books hits? There's absolutely no need to list any more sources in the article than are needed to verify the content. Notability depends on the coverage existing, not on all 450 of these references being listed in the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The abundance of reliable sources indicates this is notable enough and verifiable enough. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  11:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep notable enough based on the hundreds of related hits by third party news organizations. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 17:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. There's enough notability.--Berig (talk) 20:28, 5 May 2008 (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.