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. MBisanz ^talk 19:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Subexya Bhadel

Subexya Bhadel (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Biography whose sourcing is poor at best; Google News turns up nothing useful. — Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 07:53, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:38, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:38, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:38, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 ( talk) 12:33, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Delete PROMO, no real RS, no legit notability claim, signs of vanity, etc. Agricola44 ( talk) 15:55, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete - highly promotional article, currently very poorly sourced. Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show she meets WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep Article needs work (I did add several sources), but it's apparent Bhadel is notable. I can see she's regularly mentioned as a notable Nepali designer. I don't have access to articles in her native language, but considering how often she's mentioned in English casually (I saw more than one example of a model saying they got their break by modeling at a Subexya Bhadel show, and several examples of English sources covering her shows) I believe the article should be kept via WP:NEXIST. Lonehexagon ( talk) 19:27, 15 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Comment I agree that there are a lot of websites that discuss Bhadel and that Lonehexagon has added 2 of them to the article. But there is still nothing reliable and the article is still basically PROMO. Agricola44 ( talk) 16:17, 17 February 2018 (UTC) reply

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.