Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priya Hiranandani-Vandrevala


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 07:37, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Priya Hiranandani-Vandrevala

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Struggling to find independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Run-of-the-mill businesswoman. Promotional article. Edwardx (talk) 20:45, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 00:51, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 00:51, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 00:51, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete as above. Tacyarg (talk) 02:05, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Arguably notable, based on some of the references in the article. Business StandardEconomic Times Alternatively, Redirect to her father Niranjan Hiranandani --MelanieN (talk) 01:38, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:35, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Niranjan Hiranandani. Lack of major coverage in independent sources. Anmolbhat (talk) 15:38, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, do not redirect I agree that the sourcing doesn't qualify for notability. I oppose redirects from a BLP to another BLP on my standard grounds that it is a nightmare of a BLP violation waiting to happen. Living people are different, and they have control over their articles in a way because they are in control of the actions that they take. By redirecting to another BLP, we are making it so that the things that are associated with their name on the 5th largest website in the world are things that are completely beyond their control, even if it is a relative. Most people don't know how the MediaWiki software works, and redirects of this kind are confusing to readers. The BLP policy ranks above PRESERVE, and since there seems to be agreement that this is borderline notable at best, and likely shouldn't be an independent article, deletion is the best outcome and in order to protect the subject. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete--Pure promo spam with the typical culprits, as to sourcing.Echo TB, as to opposing a redirect. ~ Winged Blades Godric 04:30, 8 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.