Deletion of Sindhu Joy (2nd nomination)

Comment: per  and , including because based on the sources that were in the article and sources I have added to the article, following her 2006 and 2009 candidacies, Joy continued to receive news coverage in 2011, 2012, 2014, and 2016 for various aspects of her political career. In addition, her career in television has been reported on, with reference to her role as a politician, as well as biographical information
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC||WP:NPOL)

Comment: I have also made a source assessment table for what I think are the most significant sources currently in the article, and I appreciate the opportunity to do so, including because her 2005 injury at a demonstration and her 2006 incarceration, particularly in the context of the in-depth coverage of her educational endeavors at the time, do seem to be more than typical  notability, because these events were unrelated to her political career, even though they became politicized in national politics. In the discussion below, she also appears to have remained relevant to politics long after her formal political positions and unsuccessful candidacies, and to have received in-depth coverage for her non-political career in television. I did not include all of the coverage of her television career (news anchor and reality television) in the table below, nor the marriage announcement that lists her first (which seems to suggest she was the more notable party in the marriage). The following sources appear to support  and  notability
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL||WP:BASIC||WP:GNG)

Comment: Satisfies criteria #6 and #9 of , specifically Member of Parliament(MP) elections from Ernakulam and there is sufficient coverage in  outside their local area of influence as can be seen in sources in the reference section. For notability ''any one'' criteria is required
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN||WP:RS)

Comment: per , and per Bearian's arguement above. Further: a person doesnt fulfil  if they have high designation in party, but not elected. It is commonly accepted that if a politician fails NPOL, then they have to pass  with high standards, as high ranking party members are bound to be mentioned in press but it doesnt make that significant coverage. The subject here fails standard GNG. —usernamekiran
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:POLOUTCOMES||WP:NPOL||WP:GNG)

Comment: Seeing the source analysis and discussion, keep is my vote as  overrides 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NPOL)

Comment: Pinging all participants on this AFD along with those on the article to evaluate each source to see if  is established or not. There are 18 sources on the page so we can start by removing the trivial mentions and then go to the ones that need a deeper look. {{ping|Kashmorwiki|Kolma8|4meter4|Beccaynr|TheBirdsShedTears|usernamekiran|Bearian|Kaybeesquared|Ohnoitsjamie|AppuduPappudu|Drajay1976|Goldsztajn
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Per , {{tq|Local politicians whose office would not ordinarily be considered notable may still clear the bar if they have received national or international press coverage, beyond the scope of what would ordinarily be expected for their role}}, and this seems like an example of coverage beyond the scope of what would otherwise be expected
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:POLOUTCOMES)

Comment: I don't see her meeting  having never been elected to a high position, and I don't see the depth-of-coverage required for 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL||WP:GNG)

Comment: as per , the subject has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)