Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ritesh Tiwari

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:17, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ritesh Tiwari

Ritesh Tiwari (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Still not a notable politician yet. The sources in the article are trivial mentions or blogs, and no significant coverage could be found. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 21:46, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates in state legislature elections — he has to win an assembly seat, not just run for one, to clear WP:NPOL, and absent that he has to already have preexisting notability for other reasons besides the candidacy. But being secretary or spokesperson of a state political party chapter is not an automatic inclusion freebie either, and he's not sourced anywhere near well enough to clear WP:GNG for that work: the references here are glancing namechecks of his existence in coverage about other people or things, primary sources and photographs of him in stock photo databases. None of them represent reliable source coverage that is substantively about him, which means none of them assist in establishing notability at all. Bearcat (talk) 20:53, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:23, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: WP:TOOSOON and lack of independent, reliable sources. Does not meet WP:NPOL and there's nothing better. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:05, 3 April 2018 (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.