Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamil Nadu Information Commission


 * 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. Consensus is that the article should be improved, and deletion is inappropriate. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:20, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Tamil Nadu Information Commission

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No articles link to this article which subject to miss out on passing WP:GNG. The references provided are bare urls which are prone to link rots. Abishe (talk) 08:38, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Its a statutory body of a State Government . Hence have provided the State Government Links . Would further references help ?Regarding the notability, just like Prime Minister of a Country , Chief Minister of a State , RTI COmmissioner , Tamil Nadu Information Commission is notable too in my opinion . Please correct me if I am wrong .--Commons sibi (talk) 09:13, 4 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Abishe (talk) 08:38, 4 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment Well first of all the article needs to be rewritten with some copyediting. More reliable references should be added to make it beyond WP:GNG. I don't think there should be a separate article about Information Commission of a particular state in India. I also noticed there isn't any article for any other states in this regard. Abishe (talk) 13:53, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Reply CopyEditing could be done . In my opinion, some state/states not having article of their respective Information Commissioner , is not a valid argument for other states not to have it . Other way around , every state's IC article can be created . --Commons sibi (talk) 04:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep The current state of the article does not affect its notabilty, per WP:CONTN. In terms of availability of sources, A Google search indicates a fair amount of coverage, and that's just in English. It certainly doesn't seem any worse in terms of notability than any of the other articles in Category:State agencies of Tamil Nadu, or, to use an equivalent western example, List_of_California_state_agencies. There's some musing that "individuals in charge of government major departments (Transportation, Police, Education, Fire, etc.) that oversee populations of 100,000 people or more are generally considered notable". Similarly, I'd argue that bureaus of a regional government responsible for serving 72 million people should generally be considered notable. -Kieran (talk) 19:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:13, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Government bodies are generally notable. I'd want some convincing that this isnt. Rathfelder (talk) 11:08, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 09:50, 11 December 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. I spent a few minutes copyediting, and was able to quickly find further independent references to satisfy GNG. There is the potential to expand the article further. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   21:37, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:GNG . Rocky 734 (talk) 08:27, 26 December 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.