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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:06, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Israel Jebasingh[edit]

Israel Jebasingh (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)

I came across this article at NPP. I cut out a lot of spam and then searched for sources. Although Google Search gives (too) many links, I am not able to find significant reliable sources. (I searched out three sources, of which two were primary, and the third was quite insignificant; all sources from the same newspaper). I think a Delete is in order, but can change my mind if someone comes up with even a couple of reliable sources that have discussed the subject significantly. Lourdes 16:03, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:36, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete non-notable administrator.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:40, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I think WP:BIODEL and WP:SOFTDELETE can be used here to delete this article, at the closer's discretion. Lourdes 01:32, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete - Only found one reliable source reporting on the subject (thehindu, cited in the article). I think I'm going to have to agree with the nominator here, there's just not enough to make an article with, and there's only one source for the little information we do have. If additional sources are found, I would have no problem changing to keep, or allowing article recreation. Fieari (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: There's this another RS, but still insufficient for WP:GNG. Anup [Talk] 23:16, 30 September 2016 (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.