- 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. No consensus to delete - closed without prejudice to renomination if the article is not improved within a reasonable timeframe. Philg88 ♦ talk 08:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Bharatiya Pratiraksha Mazdoor Sangh
- Bharatiya Pratiraksha Mazdoor Sangh ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I cannot find any reliable, secondary coverage of this topic. I was thinking of boldly redirecting it to the page of the parent organization, but figured I'd do it via AfD so that it doesn't get recreated without sources. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 17:38, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the
list of India-related deletion discussions.
Singh (
talk) 15:05, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. Trade unions are generally notable. This looks to be a pretty large one and has been around for nearly fifty years. Given its website is in Hindi it may be a good idea to do a search in that language. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 16:08, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
- Trade unions in general might be notable, but we already have an article on the parent organization; Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh. Does the subsidiary require a separate page? I would say not. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 17:42, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
- Appears to be more of an autonomous union within a confederation than a simple subsidiary, so yes, I think it does deserve its own article. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 15:33, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 01:20, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 01:20, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kharkiv07 ( T) 00:06, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kharkiv07 ( T) 00:06, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Weak keep, seems to pass WP:SIGNIFICANCE, although barely. The number of English-language sources is very low: [1], [2], and perhaps [3] (mere acknowledgement of existence). Might be more important for hi-wiki. kashmiri TALK 00:52, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:43, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep for now only if it can be considerably better improved and, if not, nominate again for AfD attention.
SwisterTwister
talk 06:43, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- User:SwisterTwister, that is a very big "if." I didn't nominate this on a whim; a lot of my editing has been on South Asian political organizations. I searched quite a bit for coverage, and then sent it here when I found none. If you can give me some suggestions as to how improvements can be made, I will gladly withdraw the nom and make the improvements myself, since consensus here is tending towards keeping. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 07:14, 17 December 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.