Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanjay Singh

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:26, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjay Singh

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

I don't see notability per WP:POLITICIAN. bender235 (talk) 18:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This one is so easy. WP:POLITICIAN says that members of national, state and provincial legislatures are notable. The Indian parliament is its legislature, and its goverment website confirms that this man is a member. Bender235, please follow Point #4 on this list of things you are supposed to do before nominating an article for deletion. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 19:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This page should not have been nominated for deletion, given that [1], which was already cited in the article, confirms that the subject is a member of the Lok Sabha (the lower house of the parliament of India). Granted, there are some discrepancies that need to be dealt with (such as the exact spelling of his surname, his birthdate, and his marriage date), and the whole article nees to be cleaned up, but the subject does appear to be verifiably notable as a politician. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 21:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:SNOW. This one is easy. Subject has been member of Indian parliament three times - twice in the lower house and once in the upper house and he was even a cabinet minister briefly. I have cleaned up the article.--Sodabottle (talk) 04:22, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a current Parliamentarian. MLA (talk) 21:26, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Successful political candidate who meets WP:POLITICIAN. Kittybrewster ☎ 08:58, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep As made clear in preceding comments, subject is verifiably notable and easily meets WP:POLITICIAN. No grounds for deletion whatsoever, especially in light of recent cleanup.--JayJasper (talk) 02:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If there was some ambiguity over whether this subject was indeed in the legislature, deletion might be appropriate. That's not the case, though, as noted above. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 14:15, 1 March 2011 (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.