Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NRGA Act 2012


 * 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 11:06, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

NRGA Act 2012

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Are we going to have articles for every draft piece of legislation proposed by every pressure group in India? What is the point of this? We cannot even determine what it might have been because a draft, by definition, is not a static proposal. In addition, the title is misleading because the thing was never even submitted to the Lok Sabha, let alone passed as law - it is/was not an Act. Sitush (talk) 14:36, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:49, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:49, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:49, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. This isn't notable. The original version of this article was just promoting the act anyway. –Compassionate727 (T·C) 14:52, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as it never became an act and is therefore a misleading article 15:28, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This is neither a law nor a bill drafted by the Indian parliament. Rather, it is a draft prepared by a lobbying group that never made it anywhere except in a couple of brief mentions in newspaper articles. The one source doesn't name it, doesn't date it and it isn't an act by any stretch of imagination. Non-notable in the extreme. Even the lobby group is of dubious notability. The appropriate title for this article is A draft prepared by a lobbying group that never got written up for legislation. --regentspark (comment) 15:45, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:SNOW. –Compassionate727 (T·C) 15:52, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Per coverage in The Times of India, The Hindu, and The Telegraph'' for starters. For similar precedent see Category:United States proposed federal legislation AusLondonder (talk) 22:27, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note that the Category:United States proposed federal legislation is for bills that are being considered or bills that were not enacted. It does not include bills that were never bills. The act described in the article under consideration was never a bill and is actually a draft proposed by an outside non-legislative body. --regentspark (comment) 02:01, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you check every article in the category tree? AusLondonder (talk) 02:05, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No. Since I actually have an RL life, I read the category description instead. I assume that's why there is a description attached to the category. --regentspark (comment) 16:06, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No need to be so bitchy. Contributes nothing. AusLondonder (talk) 22:18, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Auslondonder, see WP:OSE. - Sitush (talk) 08:18, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete As discussed here, this is not an Act, this is not a Bill, this has never been considered by parliament or the executive. It's a proposal from one group, that's it. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  02:14, 5 May 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.