Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Major General Purna Chandra Thapa

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. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010Talk 03:08, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Major General Purna Chandra Thapa

Major General Purna Chandra Thapa (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)

Non-notable, creator has claimed alot in article without any solid proof, it needs solid sources. Lacks notability and coverage in bunch of reliable sources. Fails

WP:BLP. A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 20:24, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA1000 01:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep per SOLDIER and to counter anti-Third World bias. Nepalese officers don't get as much press as their First and Second World counterparts, but in addition to his UN posting, he is mentioned here and there,[1][2] even in a Wikileaks document. Plus he's a major general, not a lowly brigadier. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:54, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've added several posts he held. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA1000 01:08, 7 February 2015 (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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.