Deletion of Priyadarshini Raje Scindia (2nd nomination)

Comment: Arguments for deletion based on not being notable just for inheritance by birth, famedom from husband's notability, holding various posts in small institutes and being ranked in various magazines for appearances are right. But they are the reasons for deletion if the person is only one of these. The subject here is a combo of all these points. A actor who appeared in 2 non-critical films fails . A writer who wrote only one book fails . A politician who lost in election and vanished from the field since then fails . But if this person is one and same, we have him as notable enough to stay. I stick by my previous keep opinion in old AfD pointing out that she is a socialite
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACTOR||WP:NAUTHOR||WP:POLITICIAN)

Comment: I've had a long think and had a good look round for yet more sources. There is nothing here of substance except minor society sycophancy by people who still labour under the belief that she is royalty (she is not). Her primary notability is as the wife of a politician who happens to have various sinecures in his control, and of course notability is not inherited. Shobhit Gosain's arguments hold no weight in policy because  applies and because their response to Fowler&fowler is nothing but yet another personal attack from them.  Dusti seems not to have spotted that all we have in the article is namechecks and, of course, such things do not confer notability and are common in situations where sycophancy is involved
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OSE)