Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D. R. Bhandarkar

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. Notability has been established. (non-admin closure) -- Dane ^talk 02:22, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

D. R. Bhandarkar

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

)

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

Delete: Fails

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the

talk) 19:24, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the

talk) 19:24, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

• Keep. Held a
  WP:PROF#C5. We have sufficient sources on which to base a short biography, e.g. [1][2][3]. – Joe (talk) 20:58, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • I made a mistake with the sources; they're about the subject's father (R. G. Bhandarkar). However I'd still say the named professorship passes our usual standard of notability. – Joe (talk) 22:22, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Agree. The Times of India article on him -- Joe's third cited link -- is especially impressive, too.
  talk) 21:45, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Okay. Well,
    talk) 23:22, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• Weak Keep. Some evidence of notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC).[reply]
• Speedy Keep as the honorary professorship alone. SwisterTwister talk 00:46, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • A purely honorary professorship wouldn't make him notable as an academic -- but I know that's not what you mean.
    talk) 01:35, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

*Weak keep Per Xxanthippe. Subject demonstrated basic

WP:GNG. Bugmenot123123123 (talk) 16:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Striking vote of blocked user, who was only participating at AfD to make a point. Bradv 04:12, 6 January 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.