- 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. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 14:08, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
- M.G.Nagamani ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No notability asserted, sources aren't very good. Prod declined without comment Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 15:47, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 16:14, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 16:14, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - it's a biography that fails the notability criteria for WP:POLITICIAN and the referencing required for WP:BLP. There is no evidence of significant coverage. Individual appears to have failed to be voted into any significant elected office. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:19, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete I did some cleanup on non-contraversial issues (Wrap Social media links into our preferred templates, remove personal blog, remove flag prohibited by WP:MOSFLAG). This page still smacks of vanity-biography with the flowery language and no appearant claims of politician notability. Hasteur ( talk) 16:29, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - Not notable.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 19:07, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. A person does not get a Wikipedia inclusion freebie just for being an unelected candidate for office — if you cannot make a credible and properly sourced claim that they get over a Wikipedia inclusion rule for some other reason independently of the candidacy, then they have to win the seat, not just run for it, to become notable enough. But this claims nothing else that would make him more notable than the norm for non-winning political candidates, the sourcing is entirely to raw tables of election results which cannot support notability in and of themselves, and the creator's username suggests a potential conflict of interest. I also have some issues with Republican Party of India (Tamil Nadu) itself, which I'm going to explain when I list that for AFD in about two minutes. Bearcat ( talk) 22:33, 22 February 2016 (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.