Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neena Haridas


 * 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 Withdrawn by nominator - Thanks to Tomwslucer for his efforts (non-admin closure)  NickGibson3900 Talk 06:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Neena Haridas

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

NN journalist  NickGibson3900 Talk Sign my Guestbook Contributions 23:28, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Ascii002 Talk Contribs GuestBook 23:41, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Ascii002 Talk Contribs GuestBook 23:41, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:24, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - The article is calamining to be  worked for the Business Standard and for The Telegraph., where it lacks the proper and reliable references.  C ute st Penguin discuss 05:14, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 21:51, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak delete, due to lack of significant coverage about her rather than by her. On the otherhand she is/was a senior editor, widely quoted, on an important magazine and there may be coverage about her that I haven't spotted. Sionk (talk) 22:26, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. She's considered an authority on fashion, quoted often in sources here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here. She's in a top position at an important magazine in the fashion world, in a huge market, QED notable.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 01:05, 12 September 2014 (UTC) Also there is an in-depth treatment here and an interview with her in this magazine. That's two in-depth treatments. The sources quoting here can be combined to further establish notability using the Wikipedia BASIC guideline which says If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. Then, we got multiple sources. So she meets the WP:GNG.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:07, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Personally I wouldn't describe either of those as in-depth. One is an announcement of a job move in a minor news outlet, the other is a Q&A session, with Haridas doing all the talking. Sionk (talk) 10:19, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per work by User:Tomwsulcer. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 12:14, 14 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep As per Tomwsulcer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as per appreciable efforts by . &#8212;  C ute st Penguin Hangout 11:31, 15 September 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.