Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nandita P. Palshetkar


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 00:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Nandita P. Palshetkar

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Promo, saved from Speedy to let the discussion go. Some sources are present in the article, however I doubt Morpho achilles (talk) 06:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep Apart from the promotional tone, It seems a notable topic and passes WP:GNG. Nupamjo (talk) 07:11, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women,  and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:23, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 21:24, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm uncertain, but I'll say that she seems to be a leader in her field, often quoted in media, having influence in and out of academia.
 * 1) Egging on. Mother & Baby, [s. l.], v. 8, n. 5, p. 32–34, 2015. Disponível em: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f6h&AN=109268208&site=eds-live&scope=site. Acesso em: 6 ago. 2022. (mentioned seven times)
 * 2) "International Women's Day- Dr Nandita Palshetkar." BioSpectrum [India], 7 Mar. 2018. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A530135780/ITOF?u=wikipedia&sid=ebsco&xid=cf94b288. Accessed 6 Aug. 2022. (interviewed for international women's day) CT55555 (talk) 11:35, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Unambiguous promotion. All the sources listed only has trivial mention and statements from her. It doesn't cover the topic directly and in detail. No significant coverage. I don't think it passes WP:GNG. Previously, deleted as Nandita Palshetkar (logs) which is repeatedly created. Kind regards, &mdash; Tulsi   24x7  11:52, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Agreed with CT55555, doctor looks like notable. BBSTOP (talk) 05:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Relisting in hope of a stronger consensus. I'll just say what has already been mentioned that Nandita Palshetkar has been deleted before but this version of the article may be an improvement over the deleted article. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:16, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment The name is common enough that it turns up often in GScholar, not sure if she's notable as an academic or not. Oaktree b (talk) 21:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment See WP:FAME: Some subjects may seem notable because they are perceived as being important. But without meeting Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, they are not notable. As far as I can see, there's no WP:SIGCOV. &mdash; Tulsi   24x7  05:20, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment I found few more published books and publications by Nandita Palshetkar and added into article. Handbook of Drugs in Infertility, FOGSI Focus: Use of Adjuvants in Infertility, Dasgupta's Recent Advances in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, FOGSI Focus: Imaging in Obstetrics and Gynaecolog and you can find other from here. DefenderBoy27 (talk) 08:48, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It's no use finding publications written by the subject. What counts are publications (citations, reviews etc.) written independently by others about her. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I found some references that qualify it to pass WP:GNG but will request for a copyedit tag to be place instead so the promotion writing tone can be adjusted.Princek2019 (talk) 12:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Maharashtra. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 03:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep from experience this article seems to be notable and is worth encyclopedic, I suggest keeping it per the above reasons. An@ss_koko(speak up)  04:52, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY. It seems to have been improved significantly. Bearian (talk) 19:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep meets our guidelines for WP:N Lightburst (talk) 01:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.