- 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. Even looking beyond the nomination at notability and WP:BIO, appears to qualify as a winner of Miss India World. Clearly no consensus for deletion. --MCB (talk) 06:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Already exists at Reshmi ghosh RT | Talk 13:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Reshmi ghosh is a redirect to Reshmi Ghosh. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 14:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to a lack of sources. Per WP:BLP, unsourced material about living persons is always removed; in this case the whole article. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 14:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral. Looks like a fine stub now. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 16:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep - article is now sourced but even giving the benefit of the doubt to a stub I think she only just scrapes in on the right side of WP:BIO nancy (talk) 15:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Wasn't a redirect at the time this AFD was filed RT | Talk 15:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Clarification Reshmi ghosh and Reshmi Ghosh were created within minutes of each other with identical content. As the articles were the same and had only one edit each there was no history to merge and thus no need to take it to WP:SPLICE so I redirected the incorrectly capitalised version as a plausible typo. The timestamps show that the AfD was being placed on the target article at exactly the same time as I was placing the redirect. A wiki coincidence. nancy (talk) 15:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 17:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 17:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- comment. Since the nominator's concern has been met, can the nomination be withdrawn? --Paularblaster (talk) 21:57, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The reason stated by the nominator for deletion is not, and never was, valid. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:43, 21 January 2008 (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.