Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dholera Special Investment Region

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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Twinkle1990 (talk) 10:39, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dholera Special Investment Region[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

User MrsSnoozyTurtle sees the article Dholera Special Investment Region is eligible for CSD even after user Phil_Bridger contested the CSD. Even so MrsSnoozyTurtle is not happy and contusing it for CSD. I have nominated for AfD for satisfaction of them. I also raise WP:CIR of MrsSnoozyTurtle about understanding of WP:NOTABILITY, WP:THREE and WP:RS as per their recent activities.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Twinkle1990 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 January 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, India, and Gujarat. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:09, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment to nominator Twinkle1990, you need to describe in guideline/policy terms (such as not meeting GNG or other specific notability guidelines SNGs) the reason for nomination – in relation to content, not contributors. Other fora exist to clear up a dispute with another editor, and AFD is not the correct forum for that. Also please read the guidelines for AFD, especially WP:AFDEQ. Otherwise, it just wastes other editors time. Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 17:40, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But since it's here, my comment is that this sort of development usually produces only sourcing that is quite obviously regurgitated press-releases derived directly from government or architects and developers. Although this one dates back to 2019, Google still seems dominated by press-release stuff. Unless someone can find some independent sourcing, it's hard to make a good article. Maybe it's still too soon? Elemimele (talk) 19:16, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's plenty of book and scholarly coverage: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], Jfire (talk) 22:49, 16 January 2023 (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.