Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Shankar (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:22, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

David Shankar

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable singer. Fails the general and singer-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:22, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Nepal. UtherSRG (talk) 11:22, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This article was ruled a "soft" delete on September 23, just two days ago. If I am reading the history correctly, it appears that the article's creator simply removed the AfD notice and carried on, and the article was never actually deleted. Now it has been nominated for deletion again as if something different will happen this time. See the exact same course of events at Benisha Poudel, with the same article creator involved. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No it was deleted and then requested to be restored via WP:RFU. This request was fulfilled (which is why the AFD tag was removed). I then created the 2nd AFD. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:24, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One question remains: what is the likelihood of anything different happening this time? I'm undecided as a voter and it appears that few others are interested, so therefore I'm seeing wasteful bureaucracy. Sorry for all the copy/pasting. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:14, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since a restored prod or restore soft delete can not be soft deleted again, this will remain an active discussion until there is enough discussion to reach a more permanent conclusion. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:58, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

keep - There are lots of reliable and independent sources, with significant coverage.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 meet WP:GNG and notable.Endrabcwizart (talk) 16:29, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:51, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus. I think an immediate renomination to AFD after a weakly attended first AFD might not result in the permanent conclusion you expect. There would have to be substantial support for Deleting this article since Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:47, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Appears to pass WP:GNG with sources cited in the article and provided here.4meter4 (talk) 01:32, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I would request to all(for participate this afd and close.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Endrabcwizart (talk • contribs) 14 October 2023 (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.