- 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. MuZemike 06:53, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Katha Books (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This was created by someone who evidently has a conflict of interest with the subject (admins: see creator's deleted contribs in addition to extant contributions). Notability unclear. Because of COI needs to be thoroughly vetted anyway. Chick Bowen 01:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete notability not asserted Josh Parris 03:16, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- -SpacemanSpiff 04:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. All right, I've done a little more research on this, and I want to slightly amend my nomination. The organization Katha, which has had several articles in different places in the last few days deleted as either copyvios or advertisements and currently has a new (slightly better) article at Katha NGO, appears to be genuinely notable; see this story in the Times of India, for example. Obviously that article needs a lot more work, but ultimately the best thing is probably for Katha Books to be merged to Katha NGO (which should itself probably be moved elsewhere). I'm not withdrawing the nomination, however, as I think the COI here is worrisome and the best thing would be that someone else comes in and more or less starts over. Furthermore, I think Anuradha Sharma Pujari (see deletion discussion directly above this one) probably does need to be deleted outright, as there's nothing out there and this article amounts to promotion performed by her press. Chick Bowen 15:03, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: A leading name in translation in Indian publishing, after Oxford University Press, run by Katha NGO, see Gap years in India: discover a land of wondrous variety The Independent, and Translation as reclamation: It is boom time for translation in India in The Hindu, and Literacy in communities - Slum haven UNESCO. --Ekabhishektalk 18:00, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Quite notable. Could possibly be merged to NGO parent. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as a stand-alone article per improvements made by User:Ekabhishek. Abecedare (talk) 04:53, 2 November 2009 (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.