Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akbarpur (meteorite)
ping|Piotrus|Reywas92}} Hi. I see you make valid arguments. But in the end, we/wikipedia are an encyclopaedia, and not a |bureaucracy. It is clear that the subject of the article is not trying to promote themselves, and I cant see any signs of  from third party either. It passes . We are humans with , we dont always need a policy like  to tell us the subject is notable with only one verifiable source. If that is the case, what different are we from |bots, and faulty general intelligence? In my personal view, this article is way more encyclopaedic than the articles describing List of Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series) controversies#Season 10|which celebrity threw urine on who. Shouldn't we retain an article about truly encyclopaedic subject like this? Thats why gnore all rules is there for! Pretty please! In the name of science, and encyclopaedia. —usernamekiran
— [[User talk:usernamekiran|(talk)]], 18:18, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BUREAU||WP:UPE||WP:V||WP:COMMONSENSE||WP:GEOLAND||WP:BOT||WP:I (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)