- 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 speedy delete - complete copyvio. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:03, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Pathak trust (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Exists, but lacks substantial RS coverage. Zero refs. Tagged for notability for over 3 years. Also tagged as an orphan. Epeefleche (talk) 18:33, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:30, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The only thing this organisation has going for it is age, but pedigree alone does not make a not-for-profit charitable. It otherwise appears demonstrably non-notable and time to put it out of its misery after 3 years. --Legis (talk - contribs) 00:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete as a copyvio. The foundation section is copied from [1] and the lede is taken from [2]. Looking through the history, the entire thing is copied. -- Whpq (talk) 17:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The above deletion debate is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.