Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Hindu Awareness Campaign Nepal

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 redirect to Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal. There is clear consensus not to keep this as a standalone article. There is not really a consensus on whether to redirect or just delete outright, but in close cases, my inclination is to always go with the redirect. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

National Hindu Awareness Campaign Nepal

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

Event is not notable. Google news does not give any result. Even the reference cited is a blog. No proof of notability. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:13, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Highly important campaign run by former Parliamentarian Shankar Pandey. Campaign leaders have met with Prime Minister. Obviously, English language sources will be harder to find. However, "blog" cited by nom is on Nepali Times website, so is a WP:RS. Another source here. I am sure a large number of non-English sources can be found. This is a major political campaign in a non-English speaking country. WP:GEOBIAS applies to this nom. Nom initially nominated for speedy deletion (!) per WP:A7, which states "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines" and "If the claim of significance is credible the A7 tag can not be applied, even if the claim does not meet the notability guidelines". I'm pretty sure it is a credible claim to significance for former parliamentarian to start a campaign gaining national coverage AusLondonder (talk) 05:28, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that the nom has literally voted keep (as a lone voice) at Muhammad Sex Simulator 2015 on the back of Vice News coverage (the people that brought us the ground-breaking story of the London Piss Dungeon). They also consistently nominated articles for speedy that are not suitable, eg a peer reviewed journal Electronic Book Review and the Roman Catholic Church in Turkmenistan. Both with actual claims to notability. AusLondonder (talk) 05:57, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Whilst AusLondonder has accused me of WP:GEOBIAS in comment above and here also, I am inclined to feel (after reading his comment above) that this might be a case of WP:COI since he is using strong words like "Highly important campaign" and mentions the Parliamentarian name when the article itself did not mention his name or the fact that "Campaign leaders have met with Prime Minister". What we must understand is that an event does not become notable just because a Parliamentarian started it OR the leaders met the Prime Minister. That's no claim to notability. Unfortunately, in absence of credible sources, this article cannot be termed as notable enough. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 06:03, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: What has my vote here got anything to do with the AfD discussion here (which by the way was not a lone voice but that's not the point)? I don't see this discussion going anywhere as AusLondonder appears to be a case of WP:NOTHERE. I am stopping my replies to AusLondonder on all pages / TalkPages as this is a big waste of time. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 06:08, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How can this possibly be a Conflict of Interest? I have never been to Nepal, can't speak Nepalese and am not a Hindu. What a bizarre comment. Re WP:NOTHERE, I have created hundreds of pages, categories and more. Plain abuse now. AusLondonder (talk) 06:37, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but are you ok? You have written "I am inclined to feel (after reading his comment above) that this might be a case of WP:COI since he is using strong words like "Highly important campaign" and mentions the Parliamentarian name when the article itself did not mention his name or the fact that "Campaign leaders have met with Prime Minister"." - but the source I provided does just that! Please strike your comments. AusLondonder (talk) 06:39, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. AusLondonder (talk) 09:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. AusLondonder (talk) 09:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. AusLondonder (talk) 09:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This is just one of event or initiative started by Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal. This thing should be written in article of that party. We can't make separate article for their each initiative when parent article Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal itself needs very much improvement. Also it needs more references, it is not like that millions of people involved in this initiative, it is just one of political stunt and one of follower of that political party made this article, those followers should improve parent article Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal first. This event can be easily added to Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal. I think no need of AFD discussion, just be bold and merge it to parent article and leave a redirect. Main thing is that article name is "National Hindu Awareness Campaign Nepal" and given blog source no where mentions such name, article name itself a big original research. Thank you. --Human3015^TALK 17:48, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 14:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal, notability not established.--Staberinde (talk) 14:56, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per reasons stated by nominator. Because the article's sole source states that the Rastriya party denies any involvement, a redirect is inappropriate (and might be seen as POV-ish). NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:52, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another source exists, as stated above. AusLondonder (talk) 23:35, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:38, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom and NewYorkActuary. Nothing in searches shows this meets the notability criteria. I also agree with NY's assessment regarding a redirect, as I feel that would not be appropriate either. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:52, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge / Redirect over to the Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal article, given that the notability of this campaign (it has gotten some coverage, but not much) is a part of the larger framework of that party's general bunch of activities that they've been doing CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 12:59, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete possibly a redirect to Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal, but probably not a lasting search term. There is no independent notability. Good for a sentence or two, max. --Bejnar (talk) 18:37, 4 October 2015 (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.