Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akhil Bharatiya Kshatriya Mahasabha

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 keep.

Spartaz Humbug! 11:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Akhil Bharatiya Kshatriya Mahasabha

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

The article is written like advertisement and I should have opted for speedy delition. The sources listed seems to be self published by caste organisation.[1] Unacceptable unencyclopaedic fonts and the editor seems to be closely associated with the organisation. Also I doubt

talk) 05:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the
talk) 05:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Note: This discussion has been included in the
talk) 05:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted after discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 January 12. Note that there seem to be shenanigans going on here; Walrus Ji was blocked by ArbCom for reasons unknown to me.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:51, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the article is a strong keep as per my arguments in deletion review I have already cited the third party soruces confirming the notability of organiztion - any one can check deletion review page , thanks Jethwarp (talk) 11:47, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Spartaz Humbug! 08:31, 24 February 2021 (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.