Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Satwant Kaur Dogra

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Satwant Kaur Dogra

Satwant Kaur Dogra (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Seemingly autobiographical article on a non-notable politician. I was unable to find any sources on the subject apart from a single story in a local paper. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete. Non-notable local politician. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable local politician.--Regents Park (roll amongst the roses) 20:37, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non notable, as above. Created by User:Satwantkaurdogra so quite possibly a vanity article. Rehevkor (talk) 21:28, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Unless referenced Looks like non notable. OK if referenced properly with reliable and verifiable sources -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 02:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Week Keep in the event of references add. The article needs a cleanup,wikify and more material -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 13:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment: Can your provide us with possible references ? Googling apparently gave Nil results -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 10:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete. Non notable, unsourced. Bidgee (talk) 10:47, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Weak Keep. Article needs more work on sources and cleaned up as per WP:BIO. Bidgee (talk) 14:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Week keep. I think the references I've put in the article just about do the job by giving coverage of the subject and confirming the positions held by her. These are not local papers as claimed by the nominator. They are newspapers that cover a state with a population of 10 million. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I meant "local" as opposed to "national"; I couldn't even find circulation figures in the paper's website. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather see an article improved than deleted any day—otherwise I would have PRODded it or brought it to AfD sooner—but I am still not convinced that this constitutes "significant coverage". Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Some cleanup done by me... (Diff) I leave the article to 'fate' ;) -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 13:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
comment, state/provincial-level politicians don't need significant coverage, its significant that she was even elected, just as any state senator or assembly person in any American state is notable by default. Now on top of that is quite clear that she also has plenty of non-trivial news coverage in multiple reliable sources i.e. newspapers.Myheartinchile (talk) 19:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment. There is no claim in the article that she is a member of an elected assembly, just that she is a leader of a political party (with no indication of the level at which she is a leader), a local trade union organisation and a state-wide NGO. Maybe some US editors are getting a bit confused here; in an Indian context "Congress" is a political party, not a legislature. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
When I nominated the article, I couldn't verify that she was indeed an elected state-level politician, and I still haven't found Ms. Dogra in the Election Commission of India's lists of successful candidates for recent J&K elections. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. I've changed my mind. When I saw the references in state-wide newspapers referring to her as a "senior Congress leader" I assumed that that meant she was one of the top party leaders at the state level. I've now found this official list of the 144 state comittee members and she's not on it, and she also isn't on the list of district presidents. Whatever post she holds in the Congress Party must be much more junior than the newspaper articles imply. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC)