Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kakran

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. Missvain (talk) 07:53, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kakran

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

Article lacks reliable sources and is fully based on self promotional sources. Mahensingha _Talk 19:08, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:56, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:56, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nominator. A search of Indian newspapers here did not reveal anything of substance; none of the current sources are inline citations, and while that is not a reason for deletion, there are other problems with the article. What the article lede does not clarify is why is this subject notable? Needed are references which are neutral, in-depth, secondary, reliable, which address this issue clearly; if they can be found I am willing to change my view.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 14:56, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:01, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:09, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -Yes, the existing sources that appear in article are most probably not reliable sources and represent view of authors that belong or sympathize to this caste group. There are zero hits on Google books and WP:INDAFD search engines. Anyway, I'm open to amend my !vote if someone is able to find some good sources and willing to fix the article. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 07:01, 7 February 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.