Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss India CT


 * 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   no consensus. Disagreement over whether the article passes the notability guidelines or not. Davewild (talk) 10:12, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Miss India CT

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

contested prod. Lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources. Zero Google news hits. References provided appear to be either DVD sales sites or primary sources. RadioFan (talk) 17:50, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  22:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

Added more 3rd party references Wikiuser7777 (talk) 16:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:47, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. All of these contests are not notable, especially qualifying completions for a crown. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:32, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep in light of new references, now notable. Jeni  ( talk ) 16:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete This is a local beauty contest in its first annual incarnation. The event is not-notable, sorry. Warrah (talk) 19:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no policy or guideline that prohibits the creation of notable local events. Cunard (talk) 08:04, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 07:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a notable event and the information should be made available for reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellavida (talk • contribs) 02:55, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep Passes WP:N. See this article from India Weekly, this article from Greenwich Time, and this article from The Stamford Times. Notability is established by the multiple independent reliable sources in the article. Cunard (talk) 08:04, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Agree with Cunard, it passes WP:N. Wikiuser7777 (talk) 04:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Those references provided do not show notability, and the references themselves do not pass the standard set in WP:GNG. Ironholds (talk) 21:26, 25 November 2009 (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.