Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parmanand Jha


 * 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   speedy keep. WP:SNOW is falling. And AfD is not for cleanup. The Bushranger One ping only 05:43, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Parmanand Jha

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article has cited 28 references among which more than 24 do not work. The article is seriously flawed and does not have any verifiable information. I nominate this page for deletion --DBhuwanSurfer 20:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC) DBhuwanSurfer 20:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. He is the Vice President of Nepal, clearly satisfying WP:POLITICIAN. A Google search easily verifies this. Dead links are a cleanup issue, not a deletion issue. If verifiability is a problem, we can start from a stub. • Gene93k (talk) 00:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep as per Gene93k. Telco (talk) 03:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, the Vice President of a sovereign state is obviously notable. Deletion is NOT the apt method to deal with problems inside articles. Regarding sources, the article was well sourced until nepalnews.com remodelled their website making all links dead. That doesn't mean that the references are necessarily wrong, just that they need to be dated. There can still be copies of the linked articles in cache of archive.org etc.. --Soman (talk) 06:12, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree that the VP of a sovereign state is usually notable, but the referencing is in a dire state. The zeenews and BBC links work, but I don't know what the BBC one says - GoogleTranslate says it's in Hindi and gives a nearly incomprehensible translation. If someone with knowledge of the subject and/or the area could do a reference tidy-up, it would help matters. If there is just a speedy keep, no-one will bother and we'll either still have the problem, or we'll have a stub based solely on whatever those two sources say. Peridon (talk) 09:49, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep AfD is not clean up, try discussing on the article talk page. If you want help improving an article there are more appropriate ways of doing this than AfD. Cleanup should have been the first port of call. Polyamorph (talk) 10:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Perhaps the nominator could explain to us why the article is thought to be flawed. Peridon (talk) 13:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Again this is not an AfD issue, if there is flawed information in the article then it should be removed via normal editing practices, not AfD. Taking the discussion to the article talk page would be a good start. wikiproject Nepal may also be able to help. Polyamorph (talk) 15:27, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep: As others have pointed out, AfD is not the proper venue for article cleanup, and the nom's dereliction of WP:BEFORE is so severe to warrant speculation as to whether this is a bad faith nomination. The article "does not have any verifiable information?"  Excuse me?  I can't imagine that any such attempt was made.  Ravenswing  16:20, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Subject is CURRENT VICE-PRESIDENT OF A COUNTRY. No one denies this, not even the nominator, who claims to be a native of this country and is certainly very active on related articles. Can someone alert the WP:SNOW patrol and have them shut this AfD down, already? --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 05:32, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Subject is notable, per above. -LtNOWIS (talk) 14:17, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Linkrot is not a valid reason for deleting an article about the vice-president of a country. First Light (talk) 04:29, 10 October 2011 (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.