Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Public image of Narendra Modi


 * 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. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 00:30, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Public image of Narendra Modi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Is there any reason to keep an article on the public image of Modi when his own article deals with it in depth? Furthermore the article has a lot of problems with puffery and POV(which will continue as long as it exist). I propose deleting this article as most of the information here has already been given in the article about Modi. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    04:22, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep: Article is well referenced and covered by mainstream news. Moreover currently another AfD is going on Articles for deletion/List of slogans by Narendra Modi to delete List of slogans by Narendra Modi and current consensus is to merge List of slogans by Narendra Modi to this article. So there is no issue of deleting this article. -- Human 3015   TALK   04:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * There is no concern about the sourcing of the article. The concern is that this information is already present in the modi article and therefore it is not required in a separate article. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:39, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    04:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    04:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep The article is well referenced. Besides that, it would not be possible to cover everything (notable) related to his image in Narendra Modi. That would make it too long. Since he creates a new shade of his image too often (positive + negative), its better to keep it as a separate article. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Capankajsmilyo&project=en.wikipedia.org count])  05:52, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep I created this article when there was consensus that this content was WP:UNDUE for inclusion in the Narendra Modi article. See that discussion at Talk:Narendra_Modi/Archive_13. I think that it is apparent that there is a lot of content here which is not in the Narendra Modi article and which people say does not belong in that article. When a section in an article gets too long, it gets WP:FORK'ed into a new article.
 * I do not see puffery or POV content here, especially in the fashion section which I started. I would like to hear more about what anyone else sees that is a problem.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  20:22, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment: Most importantly Modi is a global leader and leader of World's largest democracy and known for his fashion and use of social media which makes his public image. This article is not "un-encyclopedic" there are such kind of articles on some world leaders like Public image of Barack Obama, Public image of Vladimir Putin. So I see nothing wrong in Public image of Narendra Modi. But there are many haters of Modi so such people may not tolerate such article as per WP:IDLI but we need to be neutral while assessing the article. We don't have to act as "Modi hater" or as "Modi fan". -- Human 3015   TALK   02:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep as a valid WP:CFORK. Remove the repetitive undue content from main article and keep only summary on it. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:46, 14 October 2015 (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.