Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rashtra Deepika

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 merge to Deepika (newspaper). -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:04, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rashtra Deepika[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)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, only one source and it's simply a directory of various newspapers. Waggie (talk) 03:37, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:08, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:08, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/merge There's an obvious alternative to deletion – merger to Deepika (newspaper) – which is the parent morning edition. We prefer this per our editing policy, WP:PRESERVE. Andrew D. (talk) 09:41, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be fine with a merge. As a side note, I've removed the unsourced and promotional content from Deepika (newspaper). Waggie (talk) 04:10, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kpg jhp jm 14:50, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Deepika (newspaper); a fine WP:ATD-M option. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:56, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes the WP:GNG per WP:SIGCOV, WP:RS, and WP:NEXIST. See also parallel nominations of Indian newspapers, all clearly failing WP:BEFORE. gidonb (talk) 03:01, 11 October 2018 (UTC) Merge. See below. gidonb (talk) 05:44, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gidonb, you keep saying I've failed to do WP:BEFORE, but strangely enough, I did. I'd appreciate if you would stop making unsubstantiated remarks like this. I'm trying to improve the encyclopedia here, as presumably you are. Could we keep this professional and courteous, please? Also, would you please point out the WP:SIGCOV and such that you refer to? Thanks! Waggie (talk) 03:56, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind seeing said sources either. Perhaps they may sway my opinion away from a merge...or maybe not. Without being able to assess the sources stated as existent, I'll stick with merge. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:16, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. In this case merger is in order. I'll take the sources that I collected over to Deepika (newspaper). gidonb (talk) 05:43, 11 October 2018 (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.