Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lakhan Pasi

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 delete. There is clear consensus at this time that the subject does not currently pass WP:GNG. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:18, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lakhan Pasi[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)

No references, and so unable to verify or to establish notability. No links to other articles, and so does not provide context, and is not encyclopedic. Robert McClenon (talk) 09:23, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 09:23, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify - potentially notable as 'Maharaja Lakhan Pasi' does get a few hits. I can see the user is working on this in draft already and have no idea why they posted this to the main space without going through AfC Spiderone 10:22, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify Agree with Spiderone - the "article", such as it is, does not negate that there exist some GNG-relevant coverage of the subject in RS/IS. — Ad Meliora ^Talk∕_Contribs 10:26, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - there's already an unsourced Draft:Lakhan Pasi, creator indefinitely blocked for topic ban problems on the Pasi caste. Creator of this new article tried to re-submit that draft a week ago, and it was declined. Captain Calm (talk) 11:27, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is far past time that we stopped tolerating unsourced articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yes, I could have said draftify if I were feeling generous (which I'm not), so as to give the creating editor the chance to yada yada... but I really hate it when people just publish stuff like this — a single-sentence stub with no punctuation, even, let alone any meaningful content or context, not to mention fancy stuff like references — and leave it for others to do the hard work of justifying why it should be kept. We don't even know if 'Lakhan Pasi' is a maharaja, a character in a Bollywood film, or the best mate of the creator's nephew! Fails on every. single. policy point, in other words. And shouldn't be allowed to get away with it, IMHO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:17, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete article contains nothing and just barely avoids multiple speedy deletion criteria. ~EdGl talk 21:13, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If there are sources supporting a potentially notable topic those sources will still be there when someone actually wants to sit down and write an article. Draftify isn’t an option for the reasons given above and if we’re ok with allowing single unsourced sentences into mainspace maybe we should consider whether we need New Pages Patrol or not. Mccapra (talk) 04:02, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article has nothing to it and is unsourced. Spiderpig662 (talk) 17:03, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There isn't anything content-wise that would be particularly useful if draftified. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:58, 16 November 2020 (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.