Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riniki Bhuyan Sarma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by WOSlinker (talk | contribs) at 07:55, 5 April 2023 (fix lint issue). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 18:36, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Riniki Bhuyan Sarma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Except being Chief Minister's wife, she has no notability. Her page was created after her husband became Chief Minister. Moreover, being an owner of a local news channel can not make her eligible for Wiki. Requesting higher level to look up the matter. - Arunudoy (talk) 01:25, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 13:02, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep per WP:BASIC - I share Hemantha's concerns about the focus of many sources, but per WP:PUBLICFIGURE, noteworthy, relevant, and well documented allegations may be possible to include (some date back to 2015), and there is biographical and career information reported within as well as in addition to those sources, e.g. [4], [5]. I also agree with FormalDude about RSF helping support her independent notability and with Mujinga on the general source assessment. Beccaynr (talk) 12:51, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep passes WP:GNG and WP:BASIC, I see some non-trivial coverage which shows that she is notable in her field. VocalIndia (talk) 08:31, 29 January 2022 (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.