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.
Being an
Indian Administrative Service officer is just a government job and doesn't automatically confer notability as per
WP:SNG. Also, the individual clearly does not meet the criteria outlined in
WP:GNG and
WP:BIO.
Charlie (
talk) 18:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 18:51, 11 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep. I would imagine the more significant role would be his position as member of his nation’s cabinet rather than merely an IAS officer. I know US cabinet members pass
WP:NPOL, and I can’t see a reason why cabinet members from other nations shouldn’t either.
4meter4 (
talk) 19:29, 11 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak keep. I'm not sure this meets the letter of NPOL: this individual is a bureaucrat, not a politician in the conventional sense of a holder of elected office. However, his position appears to be that of the highest-ranking bureaucrat in a state government, if I understand the minutiae correctly, and as such he is holding a statewide office: so I think he meets the spirit of NPOL. The coverage is very sparse, so this is a "weak" keep only. Vanamonde (
Talk) 03:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: An analysis of available reference material may be more helpful than a debate over the specifics of the job. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
SeraphimbladeTalk to me 07:15, 20 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Daniel (
talk) 15:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete: Sourcing used is simply confirmation of the appointment to the job. Nothing for sourcing we can use.
Oaktree b (
talk) 20:13, 27 October 2023 (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.