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.
trivial awards, and a relentlessly promotional article. I strongly doubt notability , but I have no doubt about the self-advertising. Read the lede paragraph. Forbes List of 100 leaders worldwide would be significant, Forbes list of 100 Indian leaders would probably be significant; Forbes list of 100 leaders in the UAE would conceivably be significant; but Forbes list of 100 Indian leaders in the UAE?
The article continues in similar detail. She lists a single meeting with the Minister of Culture as significant.
The references are almost entirely mere notices of her awards combined with PR. Not a single internationally recognized reliable source. DGG (
talk ) 18:14, 31 July 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep (weak) promo article on a non notable subject of some local importance who appears to be recognised for lifetime contributions, per sources presented by North America.
K.e.coffman (
talk) 06:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as by far nothing at all actually convincing for substance.
SwisterTwistertalk 06:59, 1 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep and tag for advertising. Even with the (potentially accidental) weasel wording, overall the article is well sourced with inline references and has some good claims for notability. Most of the awards do seem trivial, though I can't help but note that Economic Times named her one of their "20 most influential global Indian women" in 2015, which I find impressive. That combined with some of the other sources currently on the page, and I believe she passes
WP:GNG.
Yvarta (
talk) 16:16, 6 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Sam SailorTalk! 01:13, 8 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep - Agree with Northamerica1000 about article passing
WP:BASIC via available sources.
Aust331 (
talk) 09:36, 8 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep - ditto
WP:BASIC. Agree that the tone could be improved. It rather looks like someone has tried too hard to justify this article with all the awards.
Derek Andrews (
talk) 10:22, 8 August 2016 (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.