Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imran Pratapgarhi


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 23:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Imran Pratapgarhi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG Boleyn (talk) 22:18, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  Rcsprinter123     (yarn)  @ 13:25, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Rcsprinter123     (utter)  @ 13:25, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:24, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete -There appears to be some bit of coverage of subject in few reliable sources such as, -,, , . However they are not enough to help subject meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG standard (majority of the sources are only having passing/short mentions). Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  18:32, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 01:58, 31 January 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * I am looking forward to a redirect proposal. Anupmehra is right about numerous mentions in reliable sources. Noteswork (talk) 16:20, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 01:07, 7 February 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 07:53, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Lack of progress, not enough notable for having separate article. Noteswork (talk) 15:22, 14 February 2015 (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.