Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fateh Singh Ahluwalia


 * 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. (non-admin closure) gidonb (talk) 16:57, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Fateh Singh Ahluwalia

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article does not meet WP:GNG, WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO. Sources in article and WP:BEFORE revealed no WP:RS containing material that meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and in depth. Some WP:ROUTINE WP:MILL coverage exists and mentions in other articles which fall under WP:NOTINHERITED.  // Timothy ::  talk  02:39, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy ::  talk  02:39, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy ::  talk  02:39, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:53, 19 December 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per nom; no significant coverage Spiderone  14:50, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:MILPERSON as a notable Military General of the Sikh army, King, Royalty of the Kapurthala kingdom. I had searched for "Fateh Singh Ahluwalia" 1758. see,  kapurthala history Walrus Ji (talk) 13:58, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:24, 26 December 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting after a deleted close per request (with sources for consideration) as this was a close call and thus could be eligible for a third relist.
 * Delete. Insufficient reliable sources to meet WP:N or even WP:V. The government website cited above mentions the person only in passing, and it is not clear how reliable it is.  Sandstein   13:08, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment This King of an Indian state is also mentioned in the list of Rajas (kings) at Kapurthala_State. Some more sources that cover some of his military campaigns are : There are more sources on Google books for  All of these discuss this military general and king. I have no idea why Sandstein thinks that Government of India website will falsify history about an important historical person in its summary history of the kingdom. It should also be noted that the region speaks Punjabi language. I have improved the article, added refs and the image. The article of this Indian King should now be kept.  Walrus Ji (talk) 17:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history, WP:INDIA, User talk:Spiderone. Walrus Ji (talk) 17:45, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:GNG. Much can be found about him in secondary and tertiary sources.Serv181920 (talk) 17:29, 4 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep There is a lot of coverage him from non-primary sources. Also, he clearly passes WP:MILPERSON LeBron4 (talk) 17:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - The sources, especially this, show that he was an important figure in Indian history and Sikhism in particular Spiderone  18:06, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - there is no shortage of acceptable sources for this clearly notable person. Ingratis (talk) 18:58, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sikhism-related deletion discussions. Walrus Ji (talk) 05:07, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Walrus Ji (talk) 05:08, 6 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. When I go to Google Books and search for the exact title, I see the sort of coverage that suggests to me that an article could be constructed. Per WP:BEFORE, I would say the nomination isn't well-founded. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:42, 10 January 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.