Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vandita Dhariyal
- 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. ]
Vandita Dhariyal
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Vandita Dhariyal (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)
She is low-profile individual and an example of
]- Keep She passes WP:NATHLETE because she has participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level. She participated in 2009 World Aquatics Championships as well as in the 2009 Asian Indoor Games. She also won the silver in 100 metre butterfly swimming at the 2010 South Asian Games. Note: AFD is nominated by a new editor in his first edit.-Nizil (talk) 15:11, 3 November 2018 (UTC)]
- Keep She passes
- Keep Passes WP:NATHLETE, has participated in 3 major international competitions. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:59, 3 November 2018 (UTC)]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:26, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:26, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:26, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Passes WP:ATHLETE. Sources mentioned in RS are reliable. Accesscrawl (talk) 03:06, 4 November 2018 (UTC)]
- The nominator here is a new account that created has created three AFDs without proper research, and not much else.talk) 14:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)]
- Question What exactly is her notability based on? Is it because she competed at the 2009 World Aquatics Championships? There were 2556 competitors at this version of the annual event, so is every competitor at each of these annual events automatically notable? As a reference point--that's about the same number of competitors as the 2010 Winter Olympics, which encompasses a larger number of sports. I ask because her best finish was 51st (out of 57) which wouldn't be considered notable in fields like karate, taekwondo, boxing, kickboxing, etc.--where top 10 rankings are generally required. Being the first woman from her state to swim the English Channel doesn't seem to be as significant as being the youngest Australian male to make the swim, but Dan Canta's article was deleted at WP:NOTNEWS. Everyone else has indicated that notability was obvious, so I'm just trying to understand what I'm missing. Thank you. Papaursa (talk) 19:32, 4 November 2018 (UTC)]
- Comment I am new to trying to use the Wikipedia notability guidelines to assess AfD. However, it seems that, as there isn't a specific guide for swimmers, the WP:NATH guidelines for athletics are considered, which says that athletes are "presumed notable if they meet any of the criteria below" - 5, "Finished top 3 in any other major senior level international competition (this includes prestigious small field meets, e.g. IAAF Diamond League/IAAF Golden League meets, less prestigious large scale meets, e.g. Asian Games, and any IAAF Gold Label Road Race that is not explicitly mentioned above)". I was assuming that the South Asian Games (in which she won a silver medal) would count. If that is so, it doesn't matter what media coverage there was, because it says "presumed notable" - notability doesn't have to be proved through sustained coverage. That's my understanding, anyway. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:26, 5 November 2018 (UTC)]
- Keep Dhariyal's participation as noted in RS is plenty adequate to show notability as ameatur athelete. Sydney Poore/FloNight♥♥♥♥ 23:11, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
- 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.