Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fareed Nawaz Jung Devdi


 * 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. Modussiccandi (talk) 07:20, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Fareed Nawaz Jung Devdi

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

No clear indication of notability, and not appropriate for mainspace, but creator continues to move war so we're here. Language is undoubtedly an issue, but I imagine sources could be found if it's a historic building if this could spend some time in draft space. Star  Mississippi  15:37, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and India.  Star   Mississippi  15:37, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify I agree potentially notable but not ready in its current state. Mccapra (talk) 16:01, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify: Requires incubation in Draft. However, with the history of contested drafification, consider salt for mainspace until ready for acceptance 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:24, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I have move protected the article since the creator has moved it yet again. They remain able to edit the article. Star   Mississippi  14:22, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article is not so bad that it requires forcible draftification. Improving it is the solution, not draftification.  If no one is prepared to work on it, then moving to draft is just condemning it to slow death by G13.  If someone is willing to work on it, that can be done in mainspace just as well as in draft. SpinningSpark 09:23, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I see no indication of notability here or elsewhere. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:37, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Article is notable; it is one of the remaining heritage structures in Hyderabad constructed by architecture enthusiasts of that era Sir Viqar-ul-Umara.
 * copy edited, cited RS, added categories both WP and WC, added info box and WL and also moved to common name. etc :)- Omer123hussain (talk) 10:14, 19 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep. The article already has one good source, and could easily be improved. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 03:37, 23 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment from nom I would withdraw based on the improvements that make it clear what the article is about, but they're are established editors who haven't changed their !votes so I won't close. Closer can consider this nom withdrawn should they wish, or a keep vote. Whatever is easiest. Star   Mississippi  01:32, 24 July 2022 (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.