Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dilip Chalil


 * 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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:38, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Dilip Chalil

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No indication of notability in the article. A search turns up no in-depth mentions in reliable, independent sources. Consequently, fails WP:NBIO, and also fails to pass WP:NPOL as the subject has not held any office. AryKun (talk) 05:34, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per nominator. The subject is some party bureaucrat, and I could only find passing mentions in reliable secondary sources. - Tristan Surtel (talk) 11:28, 30 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete was a good candidate for speedy. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 14:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Being a member of a political party's organizing committee is not an "inherently" notable role that guarantees inclusion in Wikipedia irrespective of his sourceability or lack thereof, but the sourcing here is 5/7 primary sources that are not support for notability at all and 2/7 glancing namechecks of his existence in media coverage that isn't about him. That's not how you get a person over WP:GNG. Bearcat (talk) 14:34, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. This could well be speedy WP:G11'd. I don't see a notable individual being covered by sources here, and the article feels more like an advertisement about the individual than an encyclopedia entry. Otherwise, the individual clearly fails WP:NPOL and doesn't appear to meet WP:BASIC, from my search of sources. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 04:45, 6 November 2021 (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.