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. —SpacemanSpiff 20:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Esha Tewari Pande[edit]

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

Patent nonsense, Half of the sources are not notable. Many linked sources are written by Esha Tewari Pande herself Shobhit Gosain ^Talk 07:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: looks like WP:Promo. Article focus is on awards from a website without its own article. Timeraner (talk) 08:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, promotional article relying on flaky sources that do not establish real notability.TheLongTone (talk) 11:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as most sources are not reliable and those that appear to be either do not back the claim in the article or are trivial mentions. While there's an argument to be made for the notability of certain national pageant winners, there's no such consideration for runners-up. - Dravecky (talk) 20:47, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now and draft if actually needed - The article is neat and sourced and while I'm sure she's achieved several good things, there's no solidity and my first searches instantly found nothing good. SwisterTwister talk 05:37, 26 June 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.