- 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. — Spaceman Spiff 12:00, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Krishna Kumar Chatterjee ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
from my POV, being one of candidates to presidential posts does not grant passing WP:POLITICIAN and I don't see any references showing passing WP:GNG Arthistorian1977 ( talk) 13:19, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - I declined an A7 as I believe there is a claim to significance but do not see notability. In looking for info I did not find any significant coverage but did find passing mentions. ~ GB fan 13:23, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:24, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA 17:34, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA 17:34, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Linguist 1 1 1 21:07, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Linguist 1 1 1 21:07, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete, unless somebody can write and source something more substantial than this. Being the first woman in a country's history to run for president is certainly a valid potential notability claim that can lift a non-winning candidate above the norm — but while admittedly I'm not an expert on India, from what I know the given names "Krishna" and "Kumar" are far more usually male, not female, names. So we would have to reliably source the claim as true before we could accept it as notable, because there's already a major red flag suggesting that its truth is in question. Bearcat ( talk) 23:00, 8 August 2017 (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.