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.  Sandstein  08:50, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cachar Congress[edit]

Cachar Congress (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)

insignificant party floated by a faction that merged into another party. at best deserves a single line in any of the 2 party pages ChunnuBhai (talk) 13:21, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, insignificant, fails WP:GNG, and bad quality article too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burning Pillar (talk • contribs) 17:05, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I'm not finding much of anything at all, even unreliable sources. That the Assamese article isn't any better, and there doesn't appear to be a hi.wiki article at all doesn't bode well for notability prospects, or the likelihood of finding substantial non-English sources. TimothyJosephWood 19:09, 22 March 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.