Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Kukis of Northeast India: Politics and Culture

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. Sandstein 10:32, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Kukis of Northeast India: Politics and Culture[edit]

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

I just do not see the notability here. The only useful source given simply lists it as a reference work - no explanation, no review, no nothing. There was some potentially COI pushing of this book across various articles a short time ago and, yes, it may well be a reliable source ... but reliable sources are not inherently notable. Sitush (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctant delete. I looked for independent sources about this book, and failed to find any. We know that Indian topics are harder to source than some western ones, and this is a minority people in India. But even after making full allowance for that and for general systemic bias, I still have to agree with Sitush. The author gets a maximum of 2 cites on Scholar. There is a lot about Kuki people on, say, JSTOR, but it is not by him (no hits at all). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:32, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:01, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, it might be a very high quality work, but there simply isn't the coverage of the book itself to indicate this meets WP:NBOOK or the WP:GNG. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:25, 11 March 2014 (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.