Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sudhir Yadav (3rd nomination)


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:50, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Sudhir Yadav
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Party spokespeople are not inherently notable unless they've done something to establish notability. There is no indication that the subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy general notability guideline. Please note as pointed out in the previous AfD, the subject is not a national spokesperson for his party only the media in-charge for the party in Haryana one of the 29 states of India. GSS (talk |c|em ) 14:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 14:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 14:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete spokepeople of any type are almost never notable. Spokesperson for a political party at the sub-national state level is clearly not a notable position.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:13, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom fails WP:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN  and as noted above he is a spokesperson for a party at state or sub national level clearly not notable.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:35, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * delete after going through previous AfDs, and online search; the subject still fails WP:GNG. The post held by subject is not inherently/de-facto notable. He is not an elected member by public like an MP, or MLA. Subject fails WP:NPOL. Also, the subject doesnt significant coverage. He gets mere mentions in reliable sources. Not enough to pass WP:GNG. — usernamekiran (talk)  10:41, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete with salt. Political party spokespeople may sometimes clear WP:GNG on the basis of having enough reliable source coverage that is substantively about them, but they are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist — and the sources here are not about him, but merely namecheck his existence as a giver of soundbite in articles about other things or people, which is not the kind of "coverage" it takes to make a party spokesperson notable enough. But this has already had to be deleted three times in the past four years alone, so it's time for some seasoning. Bearcat (talk) 15:59, 20 August 2019 (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.