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 delete. SNOW. DICDEFFY article with unreliable sources on tendentious topic by now-indeffed sock of indeffed master. Drmies (talk) 02:08, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Katva[edit]

Katva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

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

Dicdef, uses unreliable sources to attempt to establish notability. Specs112 t c 15:18, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Quora is the main source for this article. Quora is a reliable enough source and has been used on other articles in Wikipedia. Prachursharma (talk) 15:22, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know almost nothing about Quora, but it seems too social-network-ish to be a reliable source. Show me another article that cites it as its main source, and is actually a good article. Besides, you haven't responded to the fact that it's a WP:DICDEF. That alone could be grounds for deletion. Specs112 t c 15:29, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • So you'd have us believe that a posting (a) by an unidentifiable person ("Anon User") whose reputation for fact checking and accuracy cannot be determined, (b) that points to this article yet was supposedly written 11 days before it, and (c) also points to Urban Dictionary as its proof, is a reliable source? If there are other articles in Wikipedia this badly sourced, as you claim, please point to them so that they can be cleaned up or deleted forthwith. Uncle G (talk) 16:07, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. LadyofShalott 17:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. LadyofShalott 17:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. LadyofShalott 17:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Dictionary definition that is clearly sourced to unreliable materials. "Anon User" does not a reliable source make. And Urban Dictionary? Are you serious? LadyofShalott 17:29, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Even if the sources were great, it would still be a DICDEF. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 21:48, 25 June 2012 (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.