Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dilip Kumar Pandey


 * 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. If somebody wants to add a one-liner about him in the party article, by all means. I would recommend not recreating a redirect until it is included (wiht a source) however. kelapstick(bainuu) 21:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Dilip Kumar Pandey

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject appears to be a minor functionary in a political party. No evidence of notability. Sources hugely fail WP:RS. PROD was removed. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:49, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Information is limited in article and with time people will add more information. Person is spokesperson of a party and all sources are reliable which is wrongly quoted by User:Ad Orientem may be check by Administrators/ reviewer.GKCH (talk) 05:08, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment In deference to GKCH I took another look at the sources. I still think they are trivial and do not establish notability as it is understood in WP:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN. But if a consensus says otherwise I will be happy to listen. Maybe I am missing something. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:21, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 05:31, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 05:33, 20 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. There is no doubt that the AAP is a notable party in India.  I'm not sure that it follows that being the official spokesperson of a party is itself grounds for notability (in many cases, party spokespeople are merely PR employees and do not occupy decision-making roles, for instance).  The sources prevented in this bio are either not independent (coming from the AAP itself), or do not discuss the person in any depth (usually just quoting them in relation to some other matter).  I don't feel it meets WP:BIO or the WP:GNG.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 13:41, 2 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect: Add a one-liner on Aam Aadmi Party about him being spokesperson and redirect it there. He isn't that notable yet for standalone article. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 05:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Person is notable, please give some more time to expand stub. 182.68.14.9 (talk) 10:03, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The cited sources that are independent of AAM are only passing mentions, which isn't enough to prove that Pandey passes WP:GNG in my opinion, and his position isn't enough to warrant a pass of WP:POLITICIAN. If a mention can be worked into the Aam Aadmi Party article then I would be fine with redirecting, but otherwise deletion seems the way to go. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 13:41, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep There is no doubt that person is notable. Yes we can add some more information to article. For more cite we can check google. 117.198.121.235 (talk) 16:58, 12 March 2014 (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.