336:: IMPORTANT : I am not in favour of deletion of any article on merely ignorance of a subject .Anyway it finally on management to allow such data pages or not. But i have noted that Jainism or jain personalities or any jain religion related pages are not entertained by Management . And deletion of such articles will only substantiate the claim. Like For Said page deletion one should visit related historical places & tally . Because what if later one finds that it was hasty decision to delete genuine personalities pages wouldnt one be guilty of same. In India there exist many history facts remain un recorded &it has to start somewhere. Now there existed many Famous Jain Monks which you cant find on Google , but what if someone tries to specify here , how you are going to justify. So i request if pages that are not creating envy should be spared in benefit of doubt. (
228:
the prod or the afd. I did so now. Of course, he was in a practical sense notified by placing the tag on the article, since he did remove the prod, but a more personal explanation such as I just gave him might work, for the article looks like it did have a source (since it seems a copypaste from an obit, possibly capable of rewriting). If not adequately sourced, of course delete. It's hard to judge from the information here whether he'd be notable, but some of the accomplishments might conceivably have specifics, though they were not given. It's possible
227:
Google is irrelevant for this sort of article. Unfortunately, I doubt that sources could be found in practice by people here. The only person likely to know sources for this is the original editor, and it looks like he has never been warned or notified or offered any help by either the person placing
369:. Ok, Jimbo and his fellow managers (don't have the slightest idea who they are) are against a certain sect. I think this is my chance to get in to the Boss's good book. So a delete reason! Seriously, this arrticle fails the notability and verifiablity standards by some miles. Thanks.
149:. I don't have the same telepathic powers as the prod nominator to enable me to know whether the article was written by a close associate of the article subject, but I agree that this is an obscure, unnotable local businessman. If you weed out all of the
153:(don't you just love "whose presence was felt like a roaring lion"?) all you seem to be left with was that he ran Mumbai's number one umbrella manufacturing business. Google Books and News archive searches find nothing and
154:
130:
I removed the prod tag from this because a prod had previously been contested. The nominator's rationale was "Article about an obscure local businessman written by a close associate of the article subject."
123:
361:
201:
309:
232:'s umbrella business was very significant--it's the second largest city in the world with 13 million people, and umbrellas are very widely used in India
197:
90:
85:
94:
77:
17:
288:. People have used Knowledge to proliferate hoaxes for their own benefit before, and Knowledge got bad press in return. AfD'd
357:
I tried to look at the article in the most sympathetic fashion that I could but could not find any good reason to keep it. --
193:
393:
36:
392:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
289:
177:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
296:
337:
268:
214:
378:
347:
327:
299:
272:
243:
219:
184:
166:
140:
59:
162:
136:
293:
81:
322:
358:
205:
343:
73:
65:
374:
209:
158:
150:
132:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
316:
181:
252:
55:
370:
281:
239:
256:
206:
56 for Tejraj
Dedavat (most of which appear to be blogs and Knowledge mirror sites)
111:
285:
264:
260:
50:
176:
Per the nominator.I myself was thinking of nominating this and other page
234:
229:
386:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
118:
107:
103:
99:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
396:). No further edits should be made to this page.
284:articles that are mostly, if not completely, un
180:for deletion for sometime.Clearly not notable.
8:
310:list of India-related deletion discussions
308:: This debate has been included in the
157:just gets Knowledge mirrors and a blog.
259:and as such does not comply with the
7:
198:4 hits for Tejraj Sagarmalji Dedavat
202:3 hits for Tejraj Sagarmal Dedavat
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
379:19:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
362:12:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
348:11:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
328:19:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
300:02:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
273:21:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
244:19:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
220:12:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
185:23:44, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
167:10:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
141:10:38, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
60:21:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
1:
194:Knowledge:Notability (people)
413:
290:Sarkar Laxmichand Hingarh
178:Sarkar Laxmichand Hingarh
389:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
251:. The article does not
346:comment was added at
155:a straight web search
261:verifiability policy
44:The result was
330:
313:
280:. We cannot have
196:. Google returns
404:
391:
351:
325:
319:
314:
304:
257:reliable sources
212:
121:
115:
97:
34:
412:
411:
407:
406:
405:
403:
402:
401:
400:
394:deletion review
387:
341:
323:
317:
217:
210:
117:
88:
72:
69:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
410:
408:
399:
398:
382:
381:
364:
359:Deepak D'Souza
352:
331:
302:
275:
246:
222:
216:My coffee shop
215:
187:
170:
169:
128:
127:
74:Tejraj Dedavat
68:
66:Tejraj Dedavat
63:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
409:
397:
395:
390:
384:
383:
380:
376:
372:
368:
365:
363:
360:
356:
353:
349:
345:
339:
335:
332:
329:
326:
320:
311:
307:
303:
301:
298:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
276:
274:
270:
266:
262:
258:
254:
250:
247:
245:
241:
237:
236:
231:
226:
223:
221:
218:
213:
207:
203:
199:
195:
191:
188:
186:
183:
179:
175:
172:
171:
168:
164:
160:
156:
152:
148:
145:
144:
143:
142:
138:
134:
125:
120:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
388:
385:
366:
354:
333:
305:
277:
248:
233:
224:
189:
173:
159:Phil Bridger
146:
133:Phil Bridger
129:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
342:—Preceding
318:Fabrictramp
211:Ravichandar
182:Shyamsunder
324:talk to me
286:verifiable
151:peacockery
255:specific
124:View log
344:undated
334:Comment
225:Comment
91:protect
86:history
371:Shovon
367:Delete
355:Delete
282:WP:BLP
278:Delete
265:Stifle
249:Delete
192:Fails
190:Delete
174:Delete
147:Delete
119:delete
95:delete
46:delete
292:too.
230:Mubai
122:) – (
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
375:talk
338:talk
306:Note
269:talk
253:cite
240:talk
204:and
163:talk
137:talk
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
56:talk
51:Cirt
340:)
315:--
312:.
235:DGG
377:)
321:|
294:VG
271:)
263:.
242:)
208:.-
200:,
165:)
139:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
58:)
48:.
373:(
350:.
297:☎
267:(
238:(
161:(
135:(
126:)
116:(
114:)
76:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.