Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poorvika

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:08, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Poorvika (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)

Fails WP:GNG/WP:CORPDEPTH. Kleuske (talk) 13:07, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:43, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:43, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Interestingly, the SPA (and possible sock) added a redirect template to the article as a hatnote -- and the only reason I can think of right now is a poor attempt to disqualify it for Afd -- changing or attempting to change namespaces is a fairly common evasion at Xfd. Anyway, I removed it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:49, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Interesting move indeed. I only found this because they posted a helpme template on their talk. Anywho, there's some descent sources out there for this subject but not enough to demonstrate notability as per WP:NCORP. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 06:00, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- does not meet WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:56, 26 November 2017 (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.