Deletion of British Raj

Comment: With an article about such an important topic, the only reason to delete would be the nonexistence of a suitable version '''anywhere''' in the history.  Is the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=156224 original version better than nothing?  I believe so, and thus without any opinion of the current state of the article, I oppose deletion.  By the way, you use "|NPOV" in a pejorative manner — are you sure that you mean "neutral point of view"?  Finally, I see comments at talk such as one opposing the idea of continuing to ; even if the Raj were a fiction or a hoax, it's gotten enough coverage that we could write an article about the impact of this legal fiction
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: Correct that the information about Indian independence belongs to the dedicated articles but this article also has ground for containing that information (though  should be followed for that with {{tl|main article}}). If you think some information does not belong to this article, you should move it to the article it should be in instead of asking for a deletion per . The subject has notability and there are absolutely no grounds for deletion of this - should be closed per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Summary style (WP:SUMMARY||WP:UGLY||WP:SNOW)