Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Major General Purna Chandra Thapa

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) –Davey2010^Talk 03:08, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Major General Purna Chandra Thapa

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

Non-notable, creator has claimed alot in article without any solid proof, it needs solid sources. Lacks notability and coverage in bunch of reliable sources. Fails WP:BLP. A.Minkowiski^{_Lets t@lk} 20:24, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: All the informations are well referenced now.-- Ascii002 (talk · contribs · guestbook) 00:43, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. @A.Minkowiski may also wish to bundle the following UN officials whose articles have been edited or created by the same user: Hafiz Masroor Ahmed (plagiarized from this), Simon Munzu (similar cut-n-paste of puffery-laden UN press-release listed as ref, as are the others that follow here), Joakim Reiter, Atul Khare, Sandra Mitchell (UNRWA), Moustapha Soumaré, Lise Grande, Raisedon Zenenga, Cristina Gallach, Lenni Montiel, Peter Thomas Drennan, Issaka Souna, Luciano Portolano, Bettina Tucci Bartsiotas, Arnauld Antoine Akodjènou, Yiping Zhou, Antonio Vigilante, Said Djinnit, Salihu Zaway Uba, María Eugenia Casar, Jessica Faieta, Aurélien Agbénonci. ...and I'm sure I've missed eleventy more. Note: some of these bios may meet minimal WP:soldier or WP:politician criteria, but articles consisting almost entirely of copy-vio warrant nuking. Pax 01:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Obviously, as a general officer per WP:SOLDIER. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:53, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per SOLDIER and to counter anti-Third World bias. Nepalese officers don't get as much press as their First and Second World counterparts, but in addition to his UN posting, he is mentioned here and there,[1][2] even in a Wikileaks document. Plus he's a major general, not a lowly brigadier. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:54, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added several posts he held. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:08, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Clearly meets WP:SOLDIER, and his U.N. service in Lebanon just adds to his notability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:28, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - sources demonstrated. We're showing our systemic bias again. Buckshot06 (talk) 22:53, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per WP:SOLDIER. Although when deleted the article needed work, that is not a reason for deletion, see WP:NOTCLEANUP.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per WP:SOLDIER, for consistency. Personally I'm of the view that WP:SOLDIER is too liberal as there are a bunch of major generals in the world who wouldn't be notable at all per WP:GNG. However a little WP:GOOGLETESTing threw up a bunch of secondary sources (and some interesting stuff on Wikileaks, though I don't know that that counts as a WP:SECONDARY source). Fiachra10003 (talk) 02:27, 14 February 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.