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 delete--Ymblanter (talk) 06:58, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bindu A. Bambah

[edit]

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

It is hard to point out a single important contribution of the subject to theoretical physics. Every person in academia over a course of time, gets a few awards and a few invited talks. These don't necessarily imply that they deserve a wikipedia page. I recommend the creator of this page to ask the following important questions: 1. What are the single most important contribution of the person to the research field? and explain why it is important (For example, some might be publications in reputed journals such as Nature, Science etc. or some might have a lot of citations (>1000). The topic of the article has neither attached with his/her name. 2. What has he/she contributed to the development of science in their country? (Example: Create a new research institute). 3. What do other experts think about their research works? (Example: Comments made by Nobel laureates etc). . Since it is hard to answer these questions, I request the deletion of this page. If required, I would recommend an expert to review the necessity of this wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indianphysicist (talk • contribs) 03:01, 15 April 2014‎

Note: I tweaked this to show up with the proper AfD template. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ///EuroCarGT 03:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. ///EuroCarGT 03:39, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. ///EuroCarGT 03:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete with GS h-index of 7 WP:Prof#C1 is not passed and there is little else. The nominator does not have to ask his questions. All he has to do is point to the WP:Prof guidelines. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:04, 15 April 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Delete as failing WP:Prof. -- 101.117.110.80 (talk) 04:43, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:54, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for lack of evidence of passing WP:PROF. If there is notability here, it seems unlikely to be for research accomplishments. And the article provides nothing else to use instead. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:14, 16 April 2014 (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.