Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sripuranthan Natarajan Idol

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. Article was nominated here 4 minutes after creation, which is strongly discouraged by a few guidelines here, among them WP:BITE and WP:BEFORE C 2. The !voters agree that the article in its present form should be kept. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 02:44, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sripuranthan Natarajan Idol[edit]

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

Wikipedia is not a newsletter. I dream of horses (C) @ 01:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (C) @ 01:47, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (C) @ 01:47, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (C) @ 01:47, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article was patrolled, while I was still in the process of typing the article (3 minutes after I first created article). Updates with more references have now been included "WestCoastMusketeer (talk) 04:36, 29 September 2015 (UTC)"[reply]

Keep: Significantly improved since nomination, with proper sources that suggest notability. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 20:25, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as this seems acceptable now. I dream of horses Are you aware of the current changes? SwisterTwister talk 07:01, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Looking in the history, this topic was notable, even in its original form, and was developing nicely. Under Wikipedia:GNG, it is the subject of an article that is notable, not its content. This was just a case of drive-by deletionism.--69.204.153.39 (talk) 16:14, 5 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.