Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ranjit Bawa

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) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ranjit Bawa[edit]

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

Questionably notable and it has not improved much since starting in March (article may have been started by Ranjit Bawa himself and had not been changed until last month) and the best my searches found were this, this and this suggesting there are surely more sources about him. However, I'm unsure if this article can be kept and improved. Pinging BethNaught. SwisterTwister talk 07:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 07:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 07:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 01:46, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article is poorly written and too reliant on one source at the moment, but of course it can be improved. For one thing he apparently won Best World Album Award in the 2015 Brit Asia Awards for Mitti Di Bawa [1]. Also paragraphs (in some cases several) on him here in Times of India, here in Hindustan Times, and here in The Tribune. This is just the English language press. I suspect there is even more in the Punjabi-language press. SwisterTwister, those articles were all in the search results you linked above. I don't understand why you didn't check the most promising individual articles before nominating this for deletion. Voceditenore (talk) 13:03, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - easily meets WP:GNG - Cwobeel (talk) 17:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The subject clearly meets wikipedia's notability guidelines per the nominator's mentioned sources and those by voceditenore. It's obvious that SwisterTwister nominated this article not for deletion, but as a motivating tool for article improvement which this article does need. That really isn't appropriate. I strongly urge Swister Twister not to use AFD so lightly in future.4meter4 (talk) 16:57, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't be so bold to say that 4meter4 as this past version here and what's more is this one clearly was not acceptable or clear with notability thus that would need an AfD. SwisterTwister talk 17:08, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect. You need to read WP:Before; in particular Section C. You knew there were reliable sources proving notability. You had the opportunity to improve the article yourself with those references. Stop waisting everyone else's time with lazy nominating habits.4meter4 (talk) 17:14, 25 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.