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 no consensus, defaults to keep. Hersfold (t/a/c) 02:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Podbharti[edit]

Podbharti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

not notable... no credible references...ChiragPatnaik (talk) 09:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Sean Whitton / 14:58, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wizardman 21:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete, Fails notability .--SkyWalker (talk) 04:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, Iam changing the vote to keep. As there is enough of reference in article to prove the article is notable. Here are more source to prove it [1], [2], [3]. I will search for more. --SkyWalker (talk) 16:02, 8 August 2008 (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.