Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pavitri Manjhi

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. Sandstein 07:11, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pavitri Manjhi

[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)

I don't see anything remotely okay that would help her pass any of our notability criterions. WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO or anything else..... ∯WBG^converse 13:48, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think we can search for "Pavitri Majhi" (alternate spelling) and see if any additional sources are available. She is quoted in TOI [1], so it is plausible that there could be more coverage. Will update and vote, after I search.--DreamLinker (talk) 19:54, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:41, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:00, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unfortunately. I tried a lot but couldn't find much about her, apart from a small amount of related news. The Chingari Award would be useful, but is cannot confer notability alone. I also have other BLP/safety concerns given her work, so I think it is best not to have an article this time. If she receives news coverage again at a later date, I won't mind having an article at that time.--DreamLinker (talk) 17:13, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Apology. I previously closed this discussion in error. My apologies to WBG. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:42, 28 February 2019 (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.