Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Chhattisgarh

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Chhattisgarh. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Chhattisgarh|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Chhattisgarh. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to India.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Chhattisgarh/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Articles for deletion

Alok Chandrakar

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

Promotional article about a political figure who fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 03:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Chhattisgarh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:07, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – The article fails WP:GNG at this time; current sources are routine announcements and do not provide independent in-depth coverage (WP:SIGCOV). I suggest draftifying so improvements can continue off-mainspace and the page can be resubmitted via AfC once stronger sources are available.

Disclosure: I created/edited this page; I have no financial, familial, or professional relationship with the subject. A no-COI statement is added on my user page. — Pranjalckar (talk) 20:03, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NPOL, as it explicitly states that Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels may be presumed notable, whereas the subject was neither of those. Ckfasdf (talk) 02:13, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Subject has not held any office that would constitute an automatic WP:NPOL pass, but the article is not referenced anywhere near well enough to establish notability for other reasons. Bearcat (talk) 17:13, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2014 Chhattisgarh attack

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

One terrorist attack that's part of a larger conflict. Only news coverage, nothing here to indicate notability. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:51, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Terrorism, and Chhattisgarh. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 22:51, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A terrorist attack is notable. I am seeing a number of AfDs for terrorist attacks in the Global South that are concerning vis a vis attacks in the Global North not getting the same scrutiny. Metallurgist (talk) 22:38, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Metallurgist unless you can point to a guideline I wasn't aware of which says terrorist attacks are inherently notable, I expect that this vote will be WP:DISCARDed when this discussion is closed. Arguments about the existence of other articles are also discarded almost automatically. Likewise to Thepharoah17's seconding of this. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 02:30, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I dont think they are inherently notable, but this had 16 deaths. Altho I will retract that its a terrorist attack. It looks like it was an attack on ~~military~~ police forces, which you can go either way on it being terrorism. Metallurgist (talk) 20:27, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Arbitrary quantities are also an improper reason to determine whether a subject is notable. Either there's sustained coverage in secondary sources or there isn't. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:13, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I am not advising any given number. If 500 people die in an incident and there is for whatever reason no sustained coverage, that isnt notable? Metallurgist (talk) 02:01, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  That's correct. If you think that there's consensus for death counts to be factored into notability, then by all means propose it at WP:Village pump (policy). But it's not currently how notability is evaluated. It's based on available sourcing. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 06:10, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Metallurgist. Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:47, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge to Naxalite–Maoist insurgency. I also found this [1] and this [2] in my BEFORE. Having said that, I agree with Thebiguglyalien's position that there is no inherent notability for terrorist attacks, regardless of casualty numbers. Chetsford (talk) 19:26, 16 August 2025 (UTC); edited 23:40, 16 August 2025 (UTC); edited 23:46, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a new suggestion to possibly Merge this article. I don't see policy-based discussions from anyone or any review of sources which would also be welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:02, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:EVENT. I see no evidence of lasting coverage or impact. We don't have an article for every deadly event on WP. LibStar (talk) 05:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NEVENT for lack of WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:DIVERSE sourcing. It's a rather minor incident too in relation to the broader topic of the Naxalite–Maoist insurgency. Focusing on it there would be WP:UNDUE.4meter4 (talk) 17:14, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See previous relisting comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:57, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Have edited main article to include coverage on aftermaths of the case, including run of case in Special SIT Court, appeal in HC and continued sustenance of the statement. Please see ^[1]^[2] or copy of HC judgement here^[3]

[1] ttps://www.thehindu.com/news/national/11-crpf-personnel-killed-in-naxal-attack-in-chhattisgarh/article17446850.ece

[2] ttps://newsarenaindia.com/states/chhattisgarh-hc-naxal-ambush-poses-threat-to-national-secur/36999

[3] ttps://highcourt.cg.gov.in/Afr/courtJudgementandAFR/2025/feb/CRA825_24(18.02.25)_4.pdf

[1]

[2]

[3]