Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Expenditure management commission

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:40, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Expenditure management commission[edit]

[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)

De-PRODed with a rationale I'm struggling to understand. Minor advisory body; little-to-no coverage in RS besides the announcement of its creation. Any coverage that this body has received or will receive will have to be covered at Premiership of Narendra Modi or elsewhere, as being related to national policy. No obvious target for a redirect, except possibly the page mentioned above. Delete, or redirect at best. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:32, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: PROD opposition not very strong, but it's there so treating this as WP:NOQUORUM just yet seems inappropriate without at least a further attempt at input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:43, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is hardly a minor body. The subsidies that it was examining are a fundamental part of India's economy and any changes would probably have significant effects on voting patterns. The references are enough to establish notability, and I added additional ones about the delivery of the commission's interim and final reports. The capitalisation in the title is wrong. The article should be moved to Expenditure Management Commission Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:35, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Eastmain. Mosaicberry (talk) 12:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The promise of this commission seems to have been a political issue for some time. Business India notes in 1997 that the commission has not yet been realised, meaning that the issue dates back even further than 97. Something that has been a matter for political comment over several decades is more than a "minor advisory body". The reports of the commission are always newsworthy with substantial articles: NDTV, 2014, Economic Times, 2014, The Hindu, 2014, NDTV, 2016. SpinningSpark 18:20, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep significant political body with SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:55, 17 April 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.