Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karnataka Forest Service

{{AFD help}}

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

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Karnataka Forest Service}})

Zero secondary sources, no evidence of notability AusLondonder (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Karnataka. AusLondonder (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. No sources on the page. RangersRus (talk) 23:33, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
• :@RangersRus Try searching for "Kannada Forest Department" instead— the article is misnamed. Brusquedandelion (talk) 05:17, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

:::I'm not sure the article is intended to be about the department. It seems to be about a role, it says the Karnataka Forest Service "is awarded to a person who is selected in the KFS exam conducted by Karnataka Public Service Commission" AusLondonder (talk) 11:53, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

::::Right, but that's clearly a content issue, and Afd is not cleanup. Brusquedandelion (talk) 07:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

::::You know what, I thought about it and you're right. Not one sentence in the article as written is actually about the department as such; it would be better to nuke it and rewrite. Brusquedandelion (talk) 02:29, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. I previously argued for a !Move vote thinking the article could be salvaged if refocused to talk about the Department, but upon further examination, not one sentence in the article is actually about the Department right now, so better off nuking and rewriting. {{strikethrough|Move to Karnataka Forest Department. This appears to be the WP:COMMONNAME of the agency, and there is plenty of coverage of it in reliable sources (though the article needs to be revised to actually reference them), including books like [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Forestry_in_Karnataka_a_Journey_of_150_Y/HF-LDwAAQBAJ Forestry in Karnataka – a Journey of 150 Years], [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Reorienting_Forest_Management_in_Karnata/WLEcEAAAQBAJ Reorienting Forest Management in Karnataka], and various news articles: [https://www.deccanherald.com/india/karnataka/forest-dept-wakes-up-as-planters-dues-hit-rs-2k-cr-2842132] [https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/bengaluru-news/karnataka-forest-department-resumes-operation-jumbo-to-capture-wild-elephants-101704992262384.html] [https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/karnataka-forest-department-launches-centralised-wildlife-crime-management-system/article67465981.ece] [https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/karnataka-forest-department-to-send-wildlife-artefacts-recovered-during-raids-for-forensic-analysis/articleshow/104725689.cms] [https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/illegal-tree-felling-in-belur-forest-department-suspends-four-officials-recommends-action-against-ifos-officer/article67684146.ece] [https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/bengaluru-news/steps-should-be-taken-to-prevent-human-wildlife-conflicts-karnataka-cm-siddaramaiah-101696043309010.html]. The article is definitely in need of heavy revision, but famously, AfD is not cleanup.}}

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

:Move to Karnataka Forest Department per above. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

::For the record, I have changed my vote. I agree an article should exist for Karnataka Forest Department, but this one isn't even pretend to be about that. Brusquedandelion (talk) 02:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

:::Yeah that's what I'm saying. The department itself may very well be notable, but this article is not about the department. It's barely clear what it's about. AusLondonder (talk) 02:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

::::Indeed. See my latest reply to your comment. Brusquedandelion (talk) 07:18, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Relisting, a review of recently found sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Final relist. A source eval would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:17, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.