Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chandra Roy-Henriksen

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. (non-admin closure) --Mdann52talk to me! 15:34, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chandra Roy-Henriksen[edit]

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

fails WP:GNG. Looks like a lady with a job and interesting family (what does not make her notable) The Banner talk 11:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Also an author. Finding material is a bit complicated by the flexibility of her names, but she is also known as Chandra Roy and as Rajkumari Chandra Kalindi Roy. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:31, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Can't there be biographies of leading members in notable royal families? Roy is from an important Bangladeshi dynasty (a major royal family of the Chittagong Hill Tracts and one of the last Buddhist royal houses of South Asia), who also happen to be influential on a national, regional and global level on issues of indigenous rights. Her brother, a leading civil rights advocate, represents Asia at the Permanent Forum's main committee. --Rainmaker23 (talk) 14:54, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The fact that she is a member of a royal family does not make her notable. Notability is not inherited. So you have to prove that she is notable. The Banner talk 18:15, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The woman is clearly an influential international figure in the struggle for indigenous peoples rights. That is enough to establish her notability.--Rainmaker23 (talk) 22:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possible, but you have to prove it with independent reliable sources. The Banner talk 00:43, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Check the references. All sources are independent.--Rainmaker23 (talk) 02:43, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per WP:NPOL, chief of secretariat of UNPFII. --Zayeem ^(talk) 07:12, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:26, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Does appear to hold a senior and influential enough post to establish notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:59, 17 June 2014 (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.