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.
T. Canens (
talk) 18:10, 13 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Still fails
WP:NBIO and
WP:GNG. Only one particular editor has so far edited this article who also happens to be the creator, and this is alone suspicious. I have also nominated the article of his non-notable organization (
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Middle Finger Protests), who's article was also created by the same editor.
Capitals00 (
talk) 06:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)reply
The article was reviewed and accepted. Having few editors shouldn't be a reason for suspicion. It has very credible sources. The subject is notable, so is his org. I would request you to reconsider. I'm not a wiki wizard like you, I really appreciate your perspective and time. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
ThisMr (
talk •
contribs) 08:55, 6 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep
You are clearly ignoring the in depth coverage of the individual and the org by reliable, credible sources. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
ThisMr (
talk •
contribs) 13:00, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
ThisMr (
talk) 13:45, 6 February 2018 (UTC) — Note to closing admin:
ThisMr (
talk •
contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this
AfD. reply
Above user is the creator of the article and has canvassed.
[1]Anmolbhat (
talk) 15:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Weak keep I am not 100% convinced of the notability of the person independently of the organisation. If the content about the org is removed, and the sources that are primarily about the organisation (only mentioning Singh's name) are discounted, what remains is a bit thin. I still think it's just on the "keep" side of the notability threshold, but I could be convinced that it is not. If deleted, it should be merged and redirected to
Middle Finger Protests. --bonadeacontributionstalk 13:36, 6 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Can you at least provide sources that made you think the article should be kept? I see none. Organization and him, both are non-notable.
Anmolbhat (
talk) 15:51, 6 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete Nothing changed since previous AFD, still a non-notable individual with no major coverage in independent sources and this comes after years of existence on Wikipedia. Notify
Reddogsix, the nominator of previous AFD.
Anmolbhat (
talk) 15:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)reply
There are more sources that can be quoted if required.
ThisMr (
talk) 17:46, 6 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete Does not satisfy
WP:NBIOand fails
WP:GNG all references are passing mention or can be sourced to the individual or his company. @
ThisMr: All the sources that you provided even though in notable publications are sourced to the individual and hence does not satisfy
WP:NBIO as per the basic criteria
WP:BASIC --Hagennos❯❯❯Talk 20:38, 6 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment The user:
ThisMr had implied in his rebuttal to the AFC that the article has passed AfC. But when looking at the AfC for this article and the users talk page I find that the AfC was deleted as abandoned and then the user went ahead and created a new article in the Mainspace. That article was also deleted via an AfD. --Hagennos❯❯❯Talk 20:51, 6 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete - Article lacks references needed to establish notability. References are passing mentions.
reddogsix (
talk) 18:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment - It is certainly not in-depth.
reddogsix (
talk) 05:39, 8 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Middle Finger Protests as it would be useful to keep the information there. The person is a member of the organisation , but it is the organisation which has received the coverage. Actually even Middle Finger Protests should be merged to
Murder of Jessica Lal. Instead of having so many fragmented pages, it would be much better to have it all together.--
DreamLinker (
talk) 04:19, 11 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep The sources are valid and clear. This conversation is nonsensical. Check the website to see how brilliant the work is. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
49.207.76.106 (
talk) 18:34, 11 February 2018 (UTC) —
49.207.76.106 (
talk) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Comment - The article still lacks in-depth, non trivial sources.
reddogsix (
talk) 18:58, 11 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete as non-notable individual with no major/in-depth coverage in independent sources. The author also appears to have COI with subject.
GSS (
talk|
c|
em) 07:10, 12 February 2018 (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.