Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pranav Pandya (AWGP)


 * 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. It looks like the article has undergone substantial changes since te nomination to remedy some of the nominator's points. Liz Read! Talk! 07:43, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Pranav Pandya (AWGP)

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

Thanks to the stupid WP:DRAFTOBJECT rule, seriously problematic articles can only be draftified once, and then need an AfD or some lame problem tags.

First award, fake. The UK parliament doesn't give this award, some obscure private organisation does.

Second award, probably fake, no actual evidence for this and unlikely that NASA would give awards for being a "reformer of Indian culture".

Third Award, some "Federation of Indian Association" would have named him "Hindu of the Year". This claim is repeated on many pages. Strangely, this award seems not to have been given to anyone else, ever

AfD is not cleanup, but how untrustworthy and dubious does an article have to be before draftifying or WP:TNT is the only solution? Fram (talk) 07:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Religion,  and India. Fram (talk) 07:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree with User:Fram that he doesn't got first 3 awards or honors but without any award and honor he is notable. As he is the head of religious organization AWGP which is the International Religious Organization and also member of the International Movement Yug Nirman Yojna. Contributor008 (talk) 08:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Then why didn't you correct this after I moved it draftspace for exactly this reason (dubious awards)? Fram (talk) 08:18, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok Sorry, Now I have corrected it. Contributor008 (talk) 10:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep it's good that the dubious awards have been removed, but the sourcing here is actually exceptionally good including 2 academic articles (one from the Journal of the American Academy of Religion) and an article from The Hindu. Jahaza (talk) 16:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per Pandya has been the subject of multiple scholarly and news articles.  W 42  13:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep- the sources available meets GNG clearly. Suryabeej      ⋠talk⋡    14:52, 3 October 2022 (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.