Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T.M. Kamble

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 Relist separately. Procedural closing without prejudice to permit immediate relisting separately--its clear that these may be of unequal notability DGG (talk) 01:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

T.M. Kamble

Related Pages:

Mass-AfD for a load of new articles on splinter parties and their politicians. The notability of the politicians comes from being the leader of various split factions of the Republican party of India, which is only valid if the factions themselves are notable. I've found no evidence that the newly formed parties are notable. Ironholds (talk) 10:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like something needs to be done, definitely. I'd support deletion with no prejudice against seeing decent articles appear in their place one day. I don;t have the knowledge to know where best to merge or redirect to. Hiding T 11:42, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd assume the Republican Party of India, but that is little more than links to articles like this. I'm not even sure how notable that core party is. Ironholds (talk) 11:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's all a bit of a mess isn't it? I don't really have the subject specific knowledge to know whether we're getting close to POV forking with all of this. Hiding T 14:00, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be leery of relying on "we can't find evidence of notability" for the splinter parties - my experience on looking at articles on Indian political parties is that even thoroughly notable ones can sometimes appear at first glance to be trivial, and we should avoid encouraging systemic bias this way. The main RPI is definitely notable (it's had Lok Sabha seats), and the Khobragade splinter ditto (it took two seats in the 1977 elections); the Kamble faction doesn't seem to have taken any seats at a national level, but this doesn't automatically make it subnotable - given the scale and fragmentation of Indian politics, achieving something at the state level would be more than sufficient. Shimgray | talk | 14:02, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Okay, at the state level, they're based in Maharashtra. According to the voluminous election statistics website, the RPI (KM) got 0.22% of the vote in seats they contested there in 2004; 1% in 1999; 3.4% in 1995; and they didn't seem to be registered in 1990. Would 3.4% of the vote in a constituency, in a normal election, be enough to class a party as notable in a European or UK article? If so, we probably ought to keep this one :-) Shimgray | talk | 14:19, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't think so. We normally do it by seats won, with exceptions for parties with good coverage by the press/significant percentages (MRLP, Green Party, etc). Ironholds (talk) 14:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly refer the following links for the different factions of republican Party of India. These factions are an important political force in India's second largest state - Maharashtra.

These parties are recognized parties, having got recognization from Indian Election Commission. These leaders are very popular leaders in Maharashtra. However their party is smaller as far as number of MPs/MLAs are concerned.

These RPI factions are more notable in India than some splinter Maoist/Naxal parties like CPI(M-L) and CPI (Maoist).

http://www.ambedkar.org/books/tu3.htm

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/india/news/article_1361655.php/Ambedkar_golden_jubilee_fails_to_reunite_RPI_factions

http://www.indianexpress.com/ie/daily/19990731/ipo31016.html

http://www.expressindia.com/news/election/fullestory.php?type=ie&content_id=44194

http://www.hindu.com/2004/03/29/stories/2004032901971300.htm

http://news.webindia123.com/news/ar_showdetails.asp?id=710030020&cat=&n_date=20071003

http://www.indianexpress.com/ie/daily/19980116/01650364.html

http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/2007-September/010208.html

http://www.rediff.com/news/1998/feb/07muslim.htm

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=ocjlRwK1y5cC&pg=PA323&lpg=PA323&dq=%22Republican+Party+%22+BC+Kamble&source=bl&ots=K4NAGyvQRm&sig=AqpcBY8IWGcOoNNKY_hwAhjT-WA&hl=en&ei=CNXQSYfEI5agkQXQtNHrCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result

http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg10106.html

http://www.expressindia.com/news/ie/daily/19990731/ipo31016.html

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/cops-force-shift-of-republican-party-rally/386524/

http://in.astrology.yahoo.com/48/20080705/814/tnl-maharashtra-s-dalit-leaders-in-a-moo.html

http://ibnlive.in.com/politics/electionstats/votespolled/1971/RPK.html

http://archive.eci.gov.in/GE2004/pollupd/pc/candlwc/RPI(KH)PCnst.htm

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rivatphil (talk • contribs) 14:46, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/2003/07/20/stories/2003072007860800.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rivatphil (talk • contribs) 14:59, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Salih (talk) 13:24, 31 March 2009 (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.