- 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 delete. Kurykh ( talk) 00:51, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Dr. S S Mantha
- Dr. S S Mantha ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This appears to be an unsourced autobiography. I am unable to find any independent RS about SS Mantha. DarjeelingTea ( talk) 04:34, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Sources provided are not reliable. Delete per WP:BLP. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 04:56, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 15:14, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 15:14, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Delete non-notable individual. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 19:10, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. What a hot mess. Reads like it was written by President Trump about his besty in India. Even if he were notable, the over the top description is pure spam. We are a charity not a web host for resumes. 02:37, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Request you to please keep the personal comments /hate aside and share constructive criticism. The article is being edited continuously and it would help if there were more serious comments about what needs to be edited instead. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unicorn bay ( talk • contribs) 07:19, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. An embarrassingly peacock BLP. No pass of WP:Prof on basis of citations. Can WP:GNG be passed as science administrator? Xxanthippe ( talk) 21:57, 15 February 2017 (UTC).
- Delete - non-notable WP:Academics and WP:GNG. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:37, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
- Weak Delete The external sources look sketchy, there are a lot of quasi-relevant things. I don't think it meets GNG. South Nashua ( talk) 21:13, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
- 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.