Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kattoor Kalasadhanam


 * 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. NorthAmerica1000 11:42, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Kattoor Kalasadhanam

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no claim of significance, no reliable sources to prove the wp:notability of the subject. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:22, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk to me  17:42, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:05, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete --Not seeing any sort of sources that would suggest subject meeting the Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  22:23, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 01:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 01:17, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can not find a hint of notability and there are no references.
 * I have had my hair cut in over 10 states (US) and my barber is one of the best and well known in my town. While I can appreciate editors wanting to make new articles there is a little issue of Wikipedia: policies and guidelines that should be adhered to. subjective importance has to be looked at through the eyes of the Wikipedia community. This article fails Core content policies and would likely always remain an orphan. I can not imagine this article even surviving a Speedy delete. We could relist it 3 or 4 more times and guess what? I am thinking it would not get any more notable. Otr500 (talk) 03:39, 24 December 2014 (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.