Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lohia (caste)

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. MBisanz ^talk 23:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lohia (caste)

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

I couldn't establish that they are WP:NOTABLE. Unclear if there is a suitable redirect. Boleyn (talk) 20:24, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:20, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:20, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Another ~~rubbish~~ article from Jat clans. All these articles must be discussed and deleted as soon as possible. Failure of WP:GNG. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:21, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You keep using this rationale even when the article makes no mention of Jat. I really think you need to start actually reading the things and doing a proper WP:BEFORE instead of ramping up this campaign. - Sitush (talk) 22:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - there appears possibly to be an alternate spelling - Lohiya - but almost all potentially reliable hits on Google, JSTOR and Questia relate to Ram Manohar Lohia and not to some social group. Even the links I give are but passing mentions. - Sitush (talk) 04:01, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:V; no sources listed and none provided at this AfD. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:14, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SNOW Delete as yet another example of the several articles, yet there's never any actual information or sources, therefore unacceptable and unimprovable. SwisterTwister talk 04:38, 30 October 2016 (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.