Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Majithia Family


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 01:43, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

The Majithia Family

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG as far as I can tell. Sources in article are primary or dead links. Individual people might be notable but notability is not inherited on a familial level. Nothing particularly notable about the family in general is found. WP:NOTINHERITED Savonneux (talk) 05:53, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &mdash″;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 03:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 03:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:26, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete This article came about because Bikram Singh Majithia was protected and the various socks couldn't edit that to add all sorts of promotional content, and have found that opportunity here. The individuals are clearly notable, but not as a family, that's how the third party coverage is. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  18:29, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination. Notability of some individuals is undisputed. But unreasonable to pass it on to the whole family. Comment State Legislature elections are scheduled in Jan 2017 in Punjab, and this article is writte in preparation for elections by SPA. ChunnuBhai (talk) 20:48, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom and above editors. Nothing in search engines to show this family meets notability requirements.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:05, 4 September 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.