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 keep. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:23, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dwarika's Hotel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

advertising CelenaSkaggs (talk) 19:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep passes WP:CORP per [1] [2] [3] [4]. SmartSE (talk) 19:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This hotel is clearly notable, as Google Books and Google News searches show. I have expanded the article, added references and removed a blog reference. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:04, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:25, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:25, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Needs improvement, but being a UNESCO Asia-Pacific Heritage Awarded establishment with historical value clearly passes notability criteria.--SamHolt6 (talk) 04:43, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Gryffindor (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep . Quite obviously notable. Meets any criterion fro WP:ORG. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:47, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:29, 20 September 2017 (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.