Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shawna Pandya


 * 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. Bishonen &#124; talk 22:04, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Shawna Pandya

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

The article, as it stands now, is largely promotional and based on primary or unreliable sources. Insufficient coverage in reliable sources to pass WP:GNG, nor does it pass subject specific guidelines at WP:ANYBIO or WP:ACADEMIC. Pburka (talk) 19:58, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG,, , , , and to a degree these as well: , , , . Yvarta (talk) 22:41, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG. There is not any reliable source about her with any depth. There is only a brief mention that she might fly into space. The rest is just quick facts. WP:TOOSOON. She's not a professor, so can't even rely on that. SW3 5DL (talk) 22:47, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * If you wouldn't mind clarifying, do you feel that the sources listed above are too short, or do you feel the content within those sources is not deep enough in terms of content matter? Yvarta (talk) 22:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. All notability (including the one apparently-reliable source in the article, the Hindustani Times article) seems to be centered around a media hoopla based on claims that she has been shortlisted to be the third Indian woman in space. Besides failing WP:BIO1E, those claims turned out to be false . And without them, she is just yet another person who wishes she were an astronaut. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:28, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Only posible notability is based on false claims. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:15, 13 March 2017 (UTC).
 * Delete - flurry of interest when she was "shortlisted" and then again when she wasn't. Otw, nothing really notable going on.Glendoremus (talk) 05:38, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - A non-notable individual that fails to meet WP:GNG. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:24, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep She was covered by RS in the news prior to the 2017 mistake. I've added sources to the article, passes GNG. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per David Eppstein. 2001:569:70DD:7500:39EA:19D8:DF90:EF4D (talk) 03:06, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep: Per WP:HEY and the work of User:Megalibrarygirl.  Combination of newsworthiness and background now meets GNG.   Montanabw (talk) 19:10, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. I would draw your attention to "as it stands now" in the call for deletion. This was the first article of a new editor. Rather than having it deleted,, wouldn't it have been more constructive to look for supporting sources as others have now done?--Ipigott (talk) 19:18, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I apologize for a poorly worded nomination. While the promotional aspect of the article could be fixed through editing, I did not feel that it could be improved to pass WP:ANYBIO. The only significant coverage is candidacy in a pretty obscure private astronaut program, which would make this WP:BLP1E; reality show contestants get more coverage than that and we don't grant them notability. The only other coverage she's received was for a local charity event, essentially a community interest story. If the article is kept, I'll be happy to help clean up the promotional aspects. Pburka (talk) 20:24, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not meet notability considerations - a non-astronaut and attending a charity event don't cut it.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:21, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * She didn't attend a charity event: she created the charity event. The coverage of her as an astronaut candidate, her charity work all taken together mean she passes GNG. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:34, 15 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Don't see the independent coverage needed for WP:GNG. 2601:248:4500:9523:43C:32C0:AC8B:3F10 (talk) 20:00, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. triviala awards and accomplishments.  DGG ( talk ) 03:29, 16 March 2017 (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.