Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shatarup Ghosh


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Shatarup Ghosh

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

Might be a case of WP:TOOSOON, but currently does not meet either WP:GNG or WP:NPOL.  Onel 5969  TT me 12:31, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:35, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Previously nominated via WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  13:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  13:50, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete not meeting WP:BIO. Not a major/leading politician. Laptopinmyhands (talk) 14:55, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep: Updated info, the politician might not won election but had leading and active role in state politics. More information is provided. AnkurPl 16:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep there's a bit of refbombing with quote-only coverage, but these three  (and this opinion piece ) seem to satisfy WP:GNG. The problem is that all these are clustered around 2011 election and while the sources are reliable, paid coverage can't be ruled out. But I'm going to vote keep on the presumption that there may be more in Bengali. Hemantha (talk) 11:56, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Additional scrutiny of the sources presented by Hemantha would be welcome. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Modussiccandi (talk) 10:11, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep Hindustan Times and Telegraph articles meet qualifications of being significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Eggishorn  (talk) (contrib) 20:36, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Has strong references and have some significant reliable sources with deep coverage. @@@ X yX   talk  14:12, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep In agreement with Hemantha. Angad.uday (talk) 20:08, 27 March 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.