Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sodha

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:03, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sodha[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 content at all. May not fulfill WP:GNG Heba Aisha (talk) 14:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Heba Aisha (talk) 14:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 14:51, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article used to have content - mostly unsourced, but it could be a starting point of verification. Now it's all removed - even the sourced part. There's this reliable source and this that actually prove the clan exists and has a history. I have also found a mention here, here and here. Enough for a stub - needs attention of a local. Less Unless (talk) 16:39, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the page history doesn't matter. It's a one-sentence article. Most viewers aren't gonna look through the page history, if it's even available to them. Currently, the content in the article currently is one sentence, so it doesn’t matter what sources we have available. It's that there is no content in the article. The page could have also been nominated for speedy deletion under criterion A1. D🎉ggy54321 ^{(happy new year!)} 03:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : Fails notability. Yeti Dai (talk) 14:39, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as already explained. Heba Aisha (talk) 07:37, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No substantial coverage, not notable. Ravensfire (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2021 (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.