Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RJ Aditi

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:19, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RJ Aditi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BIO needs references from reliable sources, other than interviews. Many of the sources which mention her do not cover her 'in depth' as required. Ireneshih (talk) 13:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 14:46, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 14:46, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Unsourced content should be removed. I think it doesn't fail WP:N. She's an award winning radio jockey.--Musa Talk 14:48, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure. On the one hand, a popular DJ with a big audience would seem to be notable. But I just can't see that the references give enough independent information that suggests this article is really about a popular DJ. Better refs would help. JMWt (talk) 17:30, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now as this article could certainly be better and I'm not seeing that yet. SwisterTwister talk 07:38, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 15:34, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:57, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per Musa Raza. Better refs need to be added and unnecessary stuff should be removed from the article. 59.88.205.154 (talk) 14:53, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I find no strong reason for deletion of article.--MahenSingha (Talk) 19:44, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. extensively promotional article, which describes the show, but does not give evidence the individual is notable. I have noconfidence at all in the reliability of the references for the purpose of showing notability DGG ( talk ) 03:19, 27 November 2015 (UTC) the[reply]
Delete. Promotional article and lacks reliable reference sources (cited sources are local / State level but the article claims high remarks like internet celebrity, digital trend setter etc. One life to live (talk) 11:44, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete insufficient coverage in reliable sources, and rather promotional. I tried to find coverage, and failed. Vanamonde93 (talk) 09:44, 4 December 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 talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.