Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amit Shah
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 11:48, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subject non notable. No significant achievement (like initiating a Water Project, Land Reforms, Building Bridges etc) during the tenure of Mayor have been mentioned to make the subject notableDoctor Bruno 19:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Mayors of Large Cities pass WP:BIO - This article is a stub is an awful criterion for deletion. WilyD 19:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep - I don't know why the user has suddenly nominated 3 Ahmedabad related articles for deletion. Agreed that they are stubs - but they are article on people who govern a city with a population of 5 million. Amit Shah is the mayor of the city. I don't understand how it fails WP:BIO - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 19:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I don't know what is wrong with you. Why are you adding afdnewbies tags to these AfDs? Do you expect a host of newbies to suddenly vote one way or the other for these articles you have nominated? - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 19:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep meets notability for me but could do with expanding. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 04:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per WP:BIO. -AED 16:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Mayor of a large city is notable. Power over 5 million people is not achieved by sitting idle, or by wasting everyone else's time if you don't win. How much research did you do before nominating the article for deletion? As AED mentioned: Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. EyeMD 18:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep per Aksi_great and also the fact that the link indicates that the mayoralty is very coveted, as can be seen from the fact that large political parties like the BJP organise the candidate for it. And if the city council does get to do what Doctorbruno says, like water and land reform, builiding bridges, then surely ruling over 5 million people doing this kind of stuff is even more notable than most backbench, junior MPs in the Indian Parliament who are entilted to their article? Blnguyen | rant-line 02:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep Is definitely notable. Seems like a bad-faith nomination due to this. --Srikeit (Talk | Email) 07:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep – nom in bad faith. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:41, 12 August 2006 (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.