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. -- Scott Burley (talk) 22:07, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MBillionth Award South Asia[edit]

MBillionth Award South Asia (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)

This award on its own doesn't seem to be notable. All the articles here are about a single individual or a company winning it. The main focus of the article ,in all cases,is the recipient. Not to mention just few sources which can be considered reliable or independent. Daiyusha (talk) 08:44, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If this article is kept after discussion, is receiving this award enough criteria for a page to be created about a company?? Daiyusha (talk) 09:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:09, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. It is true that the focus of the individual source articles is whoever won the award, but most of the titles of these articles specifically use "won the MBillionth award" as a hook. That to me seems to be a reasonable indication of notability. - Re Daiyusha's question above: I don't think that works backwards... winning one award is rarely enough to satifsy notability on its own outside the really prestigious and selective class of awards. --16:03, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Delete. Notable topics are the subject of coverage in reliable sources. Being mentioned in the title is neither here nor there. – Joe (talk) 11:20, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Joe has this exactly right, it the absence of substantial treatment by reliable sources there is no showing of notability, and no basis for the article. Arguing otherwise would lead to a walled garden. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 21:49, 1 May 2019 (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.