Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Likhoni


 * 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   speedy delete. per CSD A7 The Wordsmith Talk to me 05:49, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Likhoni

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Can't identify the significance Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 04:21, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Agree with nom. No indication of significance. NickCT (talk) 17:25, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Procedural comment: The above rationale for deletion is not a good one to me. It does not clearly state the reason why the article should be deleted. AfD Requires appropriate rationale for deletion. Wikicology (talk) 18:14, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * - Maybe so. "no indication of significance" is a criteria for speedy deletion really. I do think it's basically synonymous with "No coverage in RS" though, which is a good rationale. NickCT(talk) 22:58, 2 December 2014 (UTC)


 * The above rationale is not the appropriate one for an AfD nomination. However, "No indication of significance" is a rationale for "Speedy deletion" and if that is the rationale for deletion per the nominator's argument, then he needs not to bring it here for any discussion but tagged it per CSD in the first instance. "No indication of significance" is not in anyway synonymous to "No coverage in RS" ( which is a good rational for deletion at AfD). "No indication of significance" is never a primary valid argument for deletion here but for WP:CSD#A7 candidate. Even if an article will still get deleted per our consensus here, yet all protocol must be duely observed. Wikicology (talk) 03:50, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * - re "yet all protocol must be duely observed." - Seems like you're being a stickler for semantics, but you've got a point. NickCT (talk) 14:23, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 4 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.