Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neelam Saxena Chandra


 * 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The result was Keep - Withdrawn by nominator. WP:NAC Neil N  talk to me 14:42, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Neelam Saxena Chandra

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject does not establish the WP:Notability, cited sources are not per WP:reliable sources nor verifiable. The subject has not been covered outside of Wikipedia. It should be deleted. Justice007 (talk) 14:59, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - nomination without merit. Multiple publications, various awards. And how the heck source, including India governement, are not reliable? The claim she is not covered outside wikipedia is false. -No.Altenmann >t 15:23, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


 * The common theme in the notability guidelines is that there must be verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability but the subject does not. Justice007 (talk) 15:45, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * huh? The awards are referenced. That alone is enough. "significant attention" clause is for bios with no particularly outstanding personal achievements. That the article sucks is another issue. But notability is proven from sources quite independent from the person. Not to say that nobody bothered to search for non_english Indian sources. -No.Altenmann >t 19:20, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:07, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:07, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - there are no references in the usual sources, but I found this review, this interview, and this blog. Also, see this review and a government-sponsored conference brochure, of the 64 sources that I found online.  I'm not sure if that is enough for WP:GNG. Bearian (talk) 21:34, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Withdraw-Thanks Bearian, only this review establishes the WP:GNG, rest are not the reliable sources that are independent of the subject, anyhow I withdraw nomination for deletion request. Once again thanks for assisting to find the sources. Cheers.Justice007 (talk) 22:19, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep then; thanks. Bearian (talk) 22:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Since the editor has already stated that the page can be kept, what is required to be done now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikitasaxena (talk • contribs) 10:40, 18 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - There is also a reference to site of Consulate General of USA in Mumbai referring to an award in 2010. Therefore the page can be kept. 59.183.190.183 (talk) 12:21, 18 July 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.