Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhakt (2nd nomination)

: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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. @Thebiguglyalien or anyone else may now take a chainsaw to this to remove OR or any other issues. (non-admin closure) Toadspike [Talk] 12:05, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

=[[:Bhakt]]=

AfDs for this article:

:{{la|1=Bhakt}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Bhakt}})

Fails WP:GNG, page was previously deleted as per afd consensus. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 02:42, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 24. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:54, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep: Enough sources cited in the article. So clearly passes WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 18:21, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

::Keep. The page needs to be kept. The term 'Bhakt' exists, and is a popular one in contemporary India and sorrounding region. True, it contains a lot of original research. But it does provide a good definition of the term and origin History. Ala Ghazi fi Bhawal (talk) 09:01, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Keep, seems to be covered by sources, especially ones published after the previous AfD. With that said, there is a lot of original research in this article. It should be made up of sources specifically about the term, not ones that just use it or don't mention it at all. I'd support stubifying it by removing anything that doesn't meet this basic standard. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 21:18, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

: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.