Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geeta Bharat Jain


 * 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. There was a clear consensus to keep, notwithstanding the thoroughness of the nominaton. (non-admin closure) &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  09:57, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Geeta Bharat Jain

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Poorly sourced WP:BLP of a mayor, which basically just asserts that she exists and then reference bombs the fact of her existence with sources that aren't really building a strong notability case. While the city is large enough that she would be entitled to keep an article that had some actual substance and was sourced properly, two of the four sources here just glancingly namecheck her existence as a bystander in coverage of someone else, and one is a purely routine blurb about her initial election -- and even the one source here that might actually help to add another sentence to the article ("Bombay high court directs Mira-Bhayander mayor to appoint opposition leader") isn't really much longer than a blurb either. No prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can write more than just "she exists" and support it with enough sourcing to pass the "who have received significant press coverage" part of our criteria for local officeholders, but this as written isn't even close to adequate. Bearcat (talk) 18:49, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Delete - Article is very poorly sourced, doesn't pass WP:GNG. The sources only assert that she exists, and nothing else. SophisticatedSwampert let's talk about that 19:01, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - After reconsideration, and per 's comment, I've decided to strike my delete vote. SophisticatedSwampert let's talk about that 16:55, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep She is the mayor of an Indian city of over 800,000 people, about the size of San Francisco. The sources now in the article are adequate to expand the article slightly, adding the date she was elected and her political party, for example. I cannot support deletion unless an experienced editor fluent in the Marathi language reports that local sources cannot be found even after a diligent search. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  19:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. SophisticatedSwampert let's talk about that 19:13, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Please note that the inclusion criterion for local politicians explicitly states that the core condition is "who have been the subject of significant press coverage". So the standard that it would have to meet is not that sources would need to be determined not to exist before the article could be deleted — it's that the existence of sufficient sourcing has to be affirmatively shown before the article could be kept. Bearcat (talk) 21:35, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. SophisticatedSwampert let's talk about that 19:13, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SophisticatedSwampert let's talk about that 19:13, 16 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment WP:Politician affords the presumption of notability toward certain classes of elected officials. WP:POLOUTCOMES states that the community consensus for mayors of large cities is a keep (assuming that they were elected directly). Within WP:Politician, it is appropriate to use official sources to verify that they serve(d) in a particular office (and WP:Primary does not prohibit the use of primary sources). It is unclear from the sources, or the article about the city of Mira-Bhayandar what roles and function the mayor plays in the city. --Enos733 (talk) 15:48, 19 July 2017 (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.