Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jai Jawan Jai Kisan Party


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:40, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Jai Jawan Jai Kisan Party

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced, does not meet GNG. This exists, but the website has no candidates, no party history, and no other information other than yes, it is indeed a registered political party. The name of the party is also a seemingly unrelated political slogan and a film, both of which we have articles on. Someone apparently also missed that the article was apparently created by the guy who is the leader of the party. COI much? MSJapan (talk) 00:41, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  05:55, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  05:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:42, 23 June 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete The article asserts a bunch of unverifiable claims; the best of which is It's one of the leading parties in India. There is literally very less coverage in English language dailies in India, which I would expect for a leading party. The coverage of this party is usually trivial mentions in most news sources (I haven't been able to find a single article which talk about this party in detail). This is far from the significant coverage needed to fulfil WP:ORGDEPTH. In addition, the COI editing confirms that it is a case of WP:PROMO. Delete this article, at this time there is nothing to show that it is notable. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 14:38, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 18:27, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as no references or detected significant sources at this time, also coi, can be recreated if it gains more coverage Atlantic306 (talk) 01:26, 5 July 2016 (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.