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 KEEP. postdlf (talk) 16:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Subject not sufficiently notable - fails WP:GNG and WP:FILMMAKER, lack of reliable sources. Pol430 talk to me 13:16, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:13, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep A little research finds this individual meeting WP:GNG[1][2] and WP:CREATIVE[3] The article will benefit from cleanup and the addition of available sources, but the need for regular editing is rarely a cause for deletion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Michael Q. Schmidt. The article has POV issues, but plenty of coverage exists in reliable sources. Robofish (talk) 23:20, 26 March 2011 (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.