Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nihal Kirnalli


 * 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. I have discounted the comments made by the two ‘keep’ !votes as the users have been blocked for abusing multiple accounts or as sockpuppets and I can’t be sure that these !votes were made in good faith. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:26, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Nihal Kirnalli

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject has insignificant mentions in various reliable sources. There's no in-depth coverage available in any reliable source. The article fails to clear the WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:POLITICIAN threshold.  Lourdes  11:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 14:32, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 14:32, 10 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete: per nom, and created by a user with a possible conflict of interest. GSS (talk |c|em ) 14:39, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: The details on File:Nihal Kirnalli.jpg, where the source is given as "Own work" and the author is identified as Nihal Kirnalli, strongly hint the article Nihal Kirnalli is actually an autobiography. I'm pretty sure I've seen this before today - the "educationist" (sic) & activist stick in my mind - and not just for the large vanity work done on d:Q47798036. Anyhow, doesn't seem notable, delete. Cabayi (talk) 14:43, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete only quoted in the references, this probable autobiography does not pass WP:GNG - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atlantic306 (talk • contribs) 15:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: The creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD has been blocked indefinitly by checkuser for abusing multiple accounts. GSS (talk |c|em ) 16:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing here is an automatic pass over any of Wikipedia's "must include" criteria, and the sourcing is not good enough to get him over WP:GNG — he's not covered as the subject in his own right, but merely quoted as a giver of soundbite about other subjects, in all of the references present here. Bearcat (talk) 18:00, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete nothing even close to showing notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep It seems the category WP:Politician does not apply here as the article doesn't say that he is a Politician. I have personally found many significant coverage in couple of local languages. We should probably let this article grow as time passes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xavitorres1 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 15 February 2018 (UTC)  - —  has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and AFD. Cabayi (talk) 19:41, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You can't just say you found better sources, because anybody could say that about anything if they didn't have to prove it. You have to show the sources you found, so that we can review whether or not they're actually reliable or substantive, before "I found sources" means anything. Bearcat (talk) 19:25, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - After the above comment, I tried to find some local language links and it seems to me that there is substantial coverage on this subject and this article is currently poorly sourced. This article can be further improved with time and research and as far as I can see, it clearly passes the WP:GNG. RDB2017 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)  —  has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and AFD. Cabayi (talk) 15:32, 16 February 2018 (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.