Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kulbhushan Yadav

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 Snow Keep. (non-admin closure)Davey2010Talk 22:50, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kulbhushan Yadav (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Yadav Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:SINGLEEVENT. He could be well mentioned in the main article in Two-three lines like Pakistan claimed to arrest a RAW agent but Indian Govt. denied his links with RAW. MBlaze Lightning -talk! 07:00, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep – the event just recently occurred, and it is in the news. The article doesn't assert that he was definitely a RAW agent, but lists the allegation. The capture of a Naval Officer – of any country – is certainly notable and unfortunate, especially if they're engaged in counter-terrorism activities. The fact that he was arrested and accused is what's explained in the article. There is evidence for that. The article also asserts what your comment states: that the Indian gov't denies any affiliation (though that's standard practice). The article should be kept, and hopefully within a month, the article will be amended to say, "He was cleared of all charges and released."

    KBnaotwtleldee

    07:09, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep Passes GNG as it has been mentioned by multiple Reliable sources. His capture is the focal point of a multi nation flash point which may have global repercussions. Iran, Pakistan and India are all focused on this individual. I am not sure how anyone can even dream of him not passing GNG as almost a BILLION people are getting information about him on an hourly basis. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:12, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. InsertCleverPhraseHere 08:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There are reliable sources such as [1], [2], [3] and etc. Mhhossein (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:33, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:33, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, WP:1E and WP:TOOSOON. Userfy if desired. At this point there doesn't seem much beyond the usual Pakistan/India hysteria: someone has been charged with espionage and the other side has denied it. Indeed the refs seem tightly grouped around the accusation and the denials. Now, if this actually amounts to a trial or there are some lasting repercussions -- and notability -- then I've no issue with the article being restored. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:46, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Shawn in Montreal:I think WP:1E is the very relevant policy here, too. Mhhossein (talk) 03:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That what has been done! Which stories you are talking about? Be more sepecific please. Faizan (talk) 16:11, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The lead character of a significant incident is certainly notable.--SMahenS (Talk) 17:49, 1 April 2016 (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.