Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sreebala K Menon

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 speedy keep per nominator's withdrawal and no !votes for deletion. The nom granting "It was pretty late and didn't feel like going through the history for some reason" is a different concern toward his not following proper procedures, but his withdrawal is appreciated. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 18:09, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sreebala K Menon

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

~~Director who has little notability it appears, though the thing I find odd is the text at the top saying strong delete. Wgolf (talk) 04:20, 4 April 2015 (UTC)~~Withdrawn Wgolf (talk) 15:58, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl ^oh hello! 05:58, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl ^oh hello! 05:58, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. — kikichugirl ^oh hello! 05:58, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inclined towards keep. Coverage cited in the article and the award looks sufficient for notability. --Michig (talk) 12:12, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I was unsure at first to do-and I have no clue why it said strong delete on top (I didn't feel like going through every history update either) Wgolf (talk) 16:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INDAFD: Sreebala K Menon

Keep per meeting WP:BIO through multiple sources discussing she and her work directly and in detail. Any issue with perceived peacock terms can be addressed through regular editing. Issues that can be corrected through regular are rarely reasons to delete. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 01:46, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:36, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep This article subject meets WP:GNG by having significant coverage in multiple independent WP:RS. I would hope that in the future the nominator would more completely follow WP:BEFORE. I do not really get the meaning of this sentence nominator. "(I didn't feel like going through every history update either)" What did you mean by that statement, and how does the meaning of said statement coincide with WP:BEFORE? Cheers! WordSeventeen (talk) 08:26, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn-It was pretty late and didn't feel like going through the history for some reason. Anyway withdrawing this! Wgolf (talk) 15:58, 10 April 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.