Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting

Jump to: navigation, search

Points of interest related to India on Wikipedia:
Outline – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – To-do

Shortcuts: WP:DSI WP:DINDIA

Deletion Sorting
Project

Project page	(talk)
Lists (by ABC)
Lists (by topic)

AfD: Today, Yesterday

edit · changes

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to India. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|India|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Please indicate the title of the article in the edit summary, it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to India.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Asia

Relevant archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India/archive.

Purge page cache

Watch this page

See also: Wikipedia:Notice board for India-related topics

Note: The wubbot removes and archives closed debates from this page a few times a day, so there is no need to manually remove such pages.

[edit] India

[edit] Raju Narayana Swamy

(Find sources: "Raju Narayana Swamy" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Has a couple secondary sources, but doesn't seem notable as the sources are trivial in coverage. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:52, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:53, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] List of Songs by Mohammed Rafi

(Find sources: "List of Songs by Mohammed Rafi" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Just a list and come within WP:NOTEVERYTHING. A good and comprhensive article on Mohammed Rafi already lists notable output - this is just a directory . Also possible copy vio from [1] Velella ^{Velella Talk} 23:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete - this is pure and simple WP:LISTCRUFT and is admittedly incomplete. Eddie.willers (talk) 00:56, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Nearly every article in Wikipedia is incomplete, so that can't be used as a reason to delete, and "listcruft" is nothing more than a term of abuse rather than a reasoned argument. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep. It seems to be standard practice for major popular music stars to have complete discographies on Wikipedia, and you don't get much more major than Mohammed Rafi. This bare alphabetical listing is pretty useless in itself, but could become an acceptable article if it was sorted by year and film, and even better with the addition of the composers of the songs. We don't delete articles that have potential for improvement. The Mohammed Rafi article only scratches the surface of his output. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep but merge a condensed list to Mohammed Rafi#List of Songs. --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep needs improvement not deletion. Shyamsunder (talk) 20:59, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Merge per Ed Poor. Jclemens (talk) 21:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Dion Global Solutions Limited

(Find sources: "Dion Global Solutions Limited" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Another company "offering solutions and services", via WP:B2B, refs are typical announcements but nothing that indicates actual notability. Dennis Brown (talk) 18:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Dehradun Institute of Technology

(Find sources: "Dehradun Institute of Technology" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Contested prod. Unreferenced for over two years. No indication of any notability Andy Dingley (talk) 12:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 10. Snotbot t • c » 12:13, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep Higher education institutions are inherently notable. The problem with this article is a lack of independent references (so tag it as unreferenced), though the Institute's own web site ought to be a source. Emeraude (talk) 11:16, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Nothing is "inherently notable", it all has to meet WP:GNG. Now for high schools and upwards we have a general assumption that such establishements will be notable, but that's still not beyond challenge. In this case we have no hard sourcing that the place exists as a real school or institute, just one self-published source. For an Indian educational establishment (with all the self-serving puffery, plagiarism and downright lying that implies) that's just not enough. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:36, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

If this institution doesn't exist then it is incapable of self-serving puffery, plagiarism and downright lying. Please try to make your arguments logically consistent. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:32, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

By "exist" of course I mean "exist as an accredited educational institution", rather than just being someone with a website and a printer of degree certificates. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:51, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete - I find it difficult to reconcile those subjects which have inherent notability from the clear statements in Wikipedias notability guidelines. Why Colleges, schools, Bishops, Professors should all enjoy this automatic elevation to notability does not seem , to me at least, justifiable. This one in particular is neither referenced and is barely a stub. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 20:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Sienna Biotec

(Find sources: "Sienna Biotec" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Small Indian biochemical firm; the article previously claimed to be partnered with Siena Biotech (an Italian firm) and GlaxoSmithKline, but these claims seem to have been either misleading or entirely unsupported by the sources. The one remaining claim of involvement with a major partner is sourced to a press release from the company, which bears an astonishing similarity to this press release from the other Siena Biotech, here, with the names changed; the supposed partner, Omega, didn't issue a press release on their own site, and so I have real doubts about this claim.

If these claims are removed, we have a relatively small firm (revenues of 82M Rs. ~ 1M GPB, 1.5M USD) with no external sources provided to show its importance. The notability guidelines explicitly require significant coverage in secondary sources, and that simply isn't provided here. I've made some efforts to find any, but it's almost impossible to find anything about the firm that doesn't turn out to be discussing the Italian company. Shimgray | talk | 16:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete I'm the one who removed the false claim. It does appear that this company is attempting to make it appear that it is more important than it is. The name similarity with a bigger company is also suspicious. I can't find any sources to show notability. Dougweller (talk) 19:31, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shimgray | talk | 19:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Shimgray | talk | 19:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shimgray | talk | 19:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep The company looks like geographically limited to India with Name, The claim for International association with GSK is fairly possible, looking from techinical point of view, Alzheimer's disease, Huntington's disease and oncology are quite complex diseases and the possible drugs are yet not there in Market. Simillarly Gabapentin and Pregabalin looks like in the International patient list of new pharmaceuticals Drug. However more expert openion is required on this subject.Whileships savedhead (talk) 22:33, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Weak Keep The article requires lot of work to meet wikipedia standards, but recent activities with Omega Pharma is contradicting, Similar name also looks like a problem. The News link [[2]] clears some confusion, however I am giving it benefit of doubt, not very sure, I have added the same reference to the article main space.X*chemistry nerd (talk) 22:51, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
- That press release (issued by the company) is an almost verbatim copy of this press release (PDF), with the partner changed to Omega and the quote sourced to someone at Sienna Biotec India - it still refers to "Verona", even! It's either a deliberate attempt to mislead, or an incredibly improbable coincidence. Note that Omega, the claimed partner, has not issued any such release. Shimgray | talk | 23:14, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

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 redirect to List of airports in India. Duplicate article with an obvious redirect. No need to drag this out. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:37, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] List of international airports in India

(Find sources: "List of international airports in India" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Redundant list. There already exists an extensive list of airports in India. — Abhishek ^Talk 07:02, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — Abhishek ^Talk 07:04, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Redirect As a possible search term. No need for an AfD. Lugnuts (talk) 10:30, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Speedy redirect to List of airports in India It's a plausible search term. ApprenticeFan ^work 13:26, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Redirect to List of airports in India. Carrite (talk) 17:38, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 12 February 2012 (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.

[edit] First sanskrit Wikipedia seminar in Kerala

(Find sources: "First sanskrit Wikipedia seminar in Kerala" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Non-notable seminar. The first rule of Wikipedia is that you don't talk about Wikipedia. Cover it in the signpost or something, but not in article space. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 21:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete This seminar is all very nice, but it's not notable. Nwlaw63 (talk) 21:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Delete Second rule is you do not talk about Wikipedia, unless it's notable.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Delete as non-notable. However, despite what the nominator says in good faith, Wikipedia related topics can be notable, as long as they have received significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. It doesn't seem that this topic has. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Delete per Cullen. Non-notable. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 10:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Delete Not finding coverage in third-party reliable sources. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Delete. श्रेल्फ़ रेफ़ेरेन्तिअल् अण्ड नोत नोतब्ले. औल्द मके अ गूद सिग्न्पोस्त एन्त्र्य,म थोउगः - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete per nom, who has a very good point. ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 14:50, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] List of Pols in Ahmedabad

(Find sources: "List of Pols in Ahmedabad" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Notability. Dennis Brown (talk) 17:18, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:31, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep- Pols of Ahmadabad are not only notable but they have historical value. Have a look Pols have much to teach new Ahmedabad and this also Ahmedabad heritage set to conquer Spain. I would further request that this list is incomplete so if anyone has anymore info please complete the list. I have posted the same comment on article's talk page.--Vyom25 (talk) 07:23, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Comment: There are many articles available which discuss the pols of Ahmedabad. However, not all of them are notable by themselves. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 18:00, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Mmm. Having a list of places is perfectly reasonable - see eg/ Neighbourhoods of Delhi - regardless of the notability of individual members of the set. Shimgray | talk | 19:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] 2011 Bandra fire

(Find sources: "2011 Bandra fire" – news · books · scholar · free images)

WP:NOTNEWSPAPER article, no one died, no lasting significance. Mattg82 (talk) 15:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete: Delete it. Being the author of the article, I myself support for deletion. This article was created during my early days of Wikipedia, and so please go ahead. Thank you! -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 17:22, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete: Single event with no lasting news impact, and the creator and only significant contributor to the article also supports its deletion. Speedy Delete? Git2010 (talk) 21:15, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Mukkuva kerala

(Find sources: "Mukkuva kerala" – news · books · scholar · free images)

An incomprehensible block of text full of peacockery, POV and little explanation as to what this is even about. There are far too many Subcontinent articles like this. There was a prod tag put on this back in November, but the creator of the article removed it. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 06:14, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

KEEP 30 DAYS PENDING In my opinion, the article about this notable geographic and historic area is pretty crude and should be deleted unless a lot of improvement is made in the next 30 days. Here are some suggestions. (A) Turn article into a geography stub that points back to Kerala article, which in turn should point back to India article; (B) Purge non-neutral superior/inferior language (see WP:POV), and where absolutely necessary, use neutral language to report that others think in terms of superior/inferior; (C) Add wikilinks for terms readers in US and Britain are unlikely to know, and it iss ok if they are red provided you later create those articles too; (D) Add verifiable sources for all factual assertions; (E) Add maps and pic or two; (F) Delete after 30 days without significant improvement. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:14, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

There's not really a good way to keep for a given period of time; inevitably, we'll forget and then there'll be another AFD/MFD that reads "Holy crap we gave this guy 30 days 6 months ago. Kill it with fire." Better, I think, to userfy it and guide the author. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:10, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, then it could be "Keep pending specified improvements" and asking renoms to wait for a minimum of 30 days, and if it turns out to be longer than that the ultimate time period should be treated as irrelevant. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

The time period could be indefinite, if progress is being made. If it sits for a while, someone could shuffle it off to MFD. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:47, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Userfy. None of the problems cited by the nominator are insurmountable, and could be remedied with simple editing over time. The author does not appear to be a speaker of native English, which complicates matters. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:09, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep The subject appears notable (a notable ethnic/social group), though the text itself is a mess it looks like there should be an article about this subject at Wikipedia. Given that, I see no reason to delete it; since what it needs is a good cleanup by someone both knowledgable and with a good command of scholarly English. That's also why I oppose userfication, and think it would do much better in the main space. If we userfy it, it will just fester in the userspace of the person who created it, and stands no chance to get any outside attention from anyone that could actually help it. Articles that need cleanup should remain in the mainspace where people can find it and fix it. That's how Wikipedia works, when multiple people with different skills all end up contributing to make something better. Userfying this means it will never get improved by anyone else. Either fix it up now, or leave it for someone else with the proper knowledge and skills can fix it later. There's no rush for a perfect article now (and this one is FAR from perfect.) --Jayron32 17:22, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

As I said in the nomination, there is an inherent problem with practically all of these ethnic articles in that they stay in this unsourced, unreadable state and nothing ever gets accomplished. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 17:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:03, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Merge and redirect--I'm not an expert in this field at all, but this content seems to be about the same topic as the (notably better) article at Mukkuvar. If it is, this could be redirected there perhaps. Meelar (talk) 23:52, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Animaajit (talk) 06:53, 8 February 2012 (UTC) Since I was new to Wiki, the best thing could have been to tell me what should have been done. I made a lot of effort in coming up with the data; however, if you feel this is a tasteless peacockery, please go ahead. The first time it was put up for deletion, the user was good enough to tell me that citations were required. The same had been done, and hence the tag " put up for deletion" was removed as per Wiki's standards. If you do not understand the heritage and the customs of the people here, it would be natural for you to feel that this is all useless. The prior text was placed on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Mukkuva kerala. I've taken the liberty of moving it here to the main discussion page.Meelar (talk) 01:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

The nomination has absolutely zero to do with the subject, and entirely to do with the presentation. I resent the accusation. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 02:49, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

If it's just the presentation, then AFD is not cleanup. Presentation issues aren't for AFD to deal with. --Jayron32 04:17, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Are you reading what I'm saying? This "article" is not ready for publication. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 05:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I am reading what you are saying. Wikipedia would not exist if we waited for some arbitrary definition of "ready for publication". Please read Wikipedia:Editing_policy#Wikipedia_is_a_work_in_progress:_perfection_is_not_required. --Jayron32 05:53, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Upon further review, it might just be best to redirect this to Mukkuvar. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Fact sheet on India

(Find sources: "Fact sheet on India" – news · books · scholar · free images)

No other country has corresponding page as information should be included within main country article if relevant. Reichsfurst (talk) 16:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:41, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep. I don't understand the policy grounds for this deletion request. The page seems to be validly encyclopedic, or at least almanac, information; it doesn't obviously belong on some other project, and the facts are verifiable. It may be that this page is simply the first instance of a type of page that could be profitably added to each country as soon as someone gets bothered to do it. As Lord Featherstonehaugh-Fanshawe wrote in The Great Western Railway Co. v. Haddock, "there is no precedent for anything until it has been done for the first time." - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:46, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep

Simply because no other country has corresponding page is not a sufficient reason to decide what content must be compiled and which pages are appropriate on wikipedia.

The reasons proposed for deletion are not listed as wiki's guiding reasons for deletion. Instead of deleting this, I encourage that such pages be created for all countries.

FWIW, tabular fact sheet pages of the kind similar to Fact sheet on India are all over wikipedia, many highly viewed per day. See these for example:

etc.

Finally, I submit for matter of record that Reichsfurst originally marked the article for deletion with the following claim: "Information contained in article on India - merge would be unnecessary. This seems to basically be information copied from another site."

The proposal and reasons for deletion above, submitted on 16:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC) by Reichsfurst, have not answered my humble question to Reichsfurst. I asked the wiki contributor - "please identify where this information is available, and which site is it copied from?" I have yet to get an answer from Reichsfurst. If an answer is provided, and it is persuasive, I will happily reconsider my position. Thank you. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 16:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

In line with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion please note that ApostleVonColorado is the page's creator, which he has not made clear in his above comment. Reichsfurst (talk) 17:00, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 17:03, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete despite the above user's filibuster, I'm not convinced. This article presents nothing that isn't already in India or any of the related articles. "Fact sheets" are just plain not how we do things around here. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:36, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd agree, this title does the article no favors; something like India (statistical summary) might be more becoming. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 20:01, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I like 'change the title' suggestion. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 20:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I just re-read the article on India. Most category metrics of Fact sheet on India are not mentioned. A few that are, do not have the relative basis - that is how many countries is the ranking based on. Being 39th of 40 countries is contextually different than being 39th of 212 countries. Adding relative basis info into India, or merging all the current or future category metrics into wiki article on India may not be appropriate. I am not convinced that economic metrics such as 'Total reserves (includes gold, current US$)' belongs inside a general article such as India. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 20:15, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Comment One thing that's a bit troubling about this article leans almost exclusively on the World Bank's data, a fair bit of which seems estimated or subjective. The article almost seems like it should be titled 'The World Bank's development indicators for India'. Nwlaw63 (talk) 21:20, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, 60% of the stats are from world bank database, 40% elsewhere. Please note alternate independent sources of data for various categories exist, e.g. IMF, UNICEF, WHO, Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, etc databases. Please see WP:VNT - the guideline I followed. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 21:48, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I really just want to stress that this isn't about criticising the work which you have done AVC, I'm just not sure that this is the place to display it and the information it contains or a reference to the data could be inserted elsewhere. Reichsfurst (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate all the comments, as well as reasoned arguments that go with "keep" or "delete." Note that the article was created less than 24 hours ago. My intent was to add sufficient explanatory text, and some context, to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader. For example, not just rank with basis, but how the metric compares with the best in the world, the world average, etc.; plus, what each metric means in a context that the general reader can appreciate. I envision future wiki editors will add more tables and update these tables not only for India vis a vis the world, but also for each state/region/territory within the country - again, with context for the general reader. I feel tables enhance readability of statistical data lists; this when presented with context is validly encyclopedic. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 01:23, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep - I simply dont understand why this has been nominated on which wikipedia policy? If there is no similar article for other country doesnt mean this one also to be deleted. KuwarOnline ^Talk 07:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Strong keep - There is nothing in the article that is against Wikipedia's deletion policy. Please don't waste our time. Tinpisa (talk) 10:52, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

keep - fairly informative article, fulfilling all criteria to be on wikipedia, its a fact sheet not advertisemet. we should try to create one for other countries like china, us and uk too. Whileships savedhead (talk) 04:21, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] T. P. Sasikumar

(Find sources: "T. P. Sasikumar" – news · books · scholar · free images)

I see no evidence that the person satisfies WP:PROF, WP:BIO or WP:GNG. PROD removed by IP without explanation. Muhandes (talk) 18:33, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete Promotional article without independent sources, and with no evidence of notability. Essentially a repost of Dr T P Sasikumar, which was created by the same author, and twice speedily deleted as promotional. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:02, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Delete No notability "elements" in the article. Single digits citations on google scholar. A google search returned nothing of substance, but google news returned this one story in The Hindu: "A senior scientist dealing with the nuances of space technology, Mr. Sasikumar is on a journey to unravel the mysteries of yagas performed at various places. R. Ramabhadran Pillai meets him..." but I don't think it's enough... Tradedia (talk) 17:04, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Delete Fails WP:N,WP:PROF and WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:42, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Keerthi sagathia

(Find sources: "Keerthi sagathia" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Lack of sources on this person means fails WP:GNG, It reads like a promotional piece written by an a friend (maybe even WP:G11). Mt king ^(edits) 08:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep Having song for that many films, you'd assume he got coverage somewhere. Clicking Google news archive search at the top of this AFD, I see ample results.

The Hindu [3] The album couldn't have started on a better note. “Marhaba” by young Bollywood singer Keerthi Sagathia, is a classic example of Sufi meets Bollywood meets classic Rock. So he is in fact a Bollywood singer. I'll look through the rest, to see what else I can find. Dream Focus 10:15, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete - fails WP:GNG. VasuVR (talk, contribs) 02:07, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Weak Keep - Per coverage in The Hindu and Filmfare Magazine. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:41, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Which of those are the Significant coverage called for in WP:GNG; they are mentions and nothing more. Mt king ^(edits) 07:08, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Both provide coverage beyond a passing mention or trivial coverage. However, they may not be the most significant in terms of comprehensive coverage just about this individual. Hence, the !vote for "weak keep." See also: WP:BASIC, "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability." Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:37, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

One Doubt: Do we consider multiple film enteries under IMDB's profile as notable? Kirti Sagathia -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 12:13, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Generally no. Diego (talk) 12:43, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep Article needs substantial work to address tone issues. However, sourcing supplied strongly suggests notability, and there are quite a few smaller hits on GNews to back up the limited sourcing that is more substantial in depth of coverage. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 04:26, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

It might suggest notability but none of the sources actually demonstrates it, as you accepted here. Mt king ^(edits) 07:08, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

The sources in the article have been expanded since I posted that, and as such my opinion has changed. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 13:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Diego (talk) 12:34, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Weak keep per wp:SNOWFLAKE and WP:NRVE - Filmfare is an important reliable source for indian films, and the article is significant coverage with critical commentary. Together with the number of works in which he performs, this creates a reasonable presumption for the existence of non-english reliable sources. Diego (talk) 12:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

There also exists An interview with Delhi Belly singer Keerthi Sagathia by BBC Asian Network's Gagan Grewal (previously ~~available? here?~~) which reinforces the possibility of non-english coverage (a 'keep' criteria per Wikipedia:NRVE#NRVE) even if we don't have access to it. It's still weak evidence, so I can see this being closed as 'no consensus' to be reevaluated in a few months; this would give native speakers the chance to find reliable sources in hindi. Diego (talk) 13:04, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep This article has been viewed 401 times since it was started 7 days ago, and ten different individuals have been involved in editing it. If the article is removed it may dismay some of the readers and discourage those who contributed from further participating in Wikipedia where editors are not compensated financially for their contributions.

The article needs work, but this should not be a reason to remove it. Ottawahitech (talk) 04:44, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

In fairness, none of those are reasons to keep it, either :). ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 05:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

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. Xavexgoem (talk) 17:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Lokmanya nagar

(Find sources: "Lokmanya nagar" – news · books · scholar · free images)

This article has multiple issues This article reads like a travel advisory so a website like TripAdvisor seems to be better suited for this article There is no geographical (state, city, country information), population or other info available. Is this a ghost town? Any notable persons from this town? I think articles like this which are more than a month old need to be deleted. If the author is not interested for months then so should we. Wikishagnik (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep It is not necessary for notable people to come from a town for a town to be notable. The town is clearly not a ghost town since it has public transport services. Inactivity of the articles author is in no way an indicator of an articles notability. The town has been mentioned in a "The Times Of India". This nomination is a clear example of cultural bias.Flaviusvulso (talk) 21:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep An incomplete and not balanced article, but all places are notable at Wikipedia, and so there is basis only for editing, not deletion. I suggest the nominator learn a little about WP:Deletion policy before making further nominations. DGG ( talk ) 01:51, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Doubt: Are localities in a town also automatically notable? This is just an area of Thane city. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 12:51, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep As per DGG, all places are notable in Wikipedia KuwarOnline ^Talk 19:19, 8 February 2012 (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.

[edit] Income Tax Department (Bangalore)

(Find sources: "Income Tax Department (Bangalore)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Local branch of a national agency, with the information either totally non-specific or organizational details of concern only to those who work within it. DGG ( talk ) 02:54, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

If police organisations can have their own wikipedia articles,giving information then why the unnecessary picking on Income Tax Department.9(Nirmal95 (talk) 06:41, 5 February 2012 (UTC))

Delete - As a sub-sub-unit of an organisation with local juridisdiction, and no particular claim to notability beyond what the parent organisation does, it fails to meed the inclusion guideline for WP:ORG. -- Whpq (talk) 17:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:09, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete as it is a copyright problem with http://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/prototype/ccit/CBDT.asp (Duplication Detector report). ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:10, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
- Also, the nominator has a point, it has very little information about the agency itself (without the copyvio stuff), rather the people in it. ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
- The article is also a duplicate of Central Board for Direct Taxes, which has the same concept AND, coincidentally, the same copyright problem. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:23, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Jasmin Bhasin

(Find sources: "Jasmin Bhasin" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Fails WP:NACTOR. Has had one mid-level role in the Tamil film Vaanam. Notability has not been asserted. Note - before deciding to nominate here, I checked the 3 external links in the article. None were useful/working, so I removed them. They can be found in the edit history, obviously. Colon el Tom 13:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete The subject lacks significant coverage in reliable third party sources, and fails to meet the notability guidelines for biographies. Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 17:12, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Namassej Samaj Andolon

(Find sources: "Namassej Samaj Andolon" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG, is promotional in intent and appears to have been created by someone with a WP:COI. My PROD met with an objection. I think that it has been deleted previously. I would support a merge/redirect to Namasudra rather than deletion but the creator appears to want to keep the things separate. Sitush (talk) 07:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:30, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 13:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Merge with Namasudra#Community association as per the nominator. It was requested for speedy deletion A7 once, which was declined by the admin. Your PROD failed. It's time it went to AfD. The merge seems to be reasonable, as there is indeed a section for this at Namasudra, but I'm definitely not an expert on the subject. ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 15:14, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Him Ganga Hum

(Find sources: "Him Ganga Hum" – news · books · scholar · free images)

The subject of the article appears to be a non-notable documentary. The subject lacks significant coverage in reliable third party sources and fails the notability guidelines. Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 20:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 17:12, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Dexetra

(Find sources: "Dexetra" – news · books · scholar · free images)

According to WP:ORG, An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. There is no secondary source that discusses Dexetra (the company) in detail, the sources are about Iris (the product, not the company). The only reference I can find which has an incidental and trivial coverage about this company is this which I believe is not sufficient to meet the criteria of WP:ORG. SupernovaExplosion (talk) 16:22, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete As the nominator. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 06:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I declined this speedy delete because of the claim to produce Iris (software) which is famous enough to be discussed om Tech Talk Radio podcast. However I have not check if there is any substantial coverage on the company. Searchers should also use local languages. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:12, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
keep I have added three independent references to show WP:GNG is satisfied. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 18:00, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete I do not think the sources are sufficient to show .notability I see the first source indicates that it received funding -- but for only $200,000. DGG ( talk ) 05:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Redirect and possibly selective merge to Iris (software). The larger question is whether that also-ran personal assistant software for some mobile phones has the kind of significance for all the rest of human history (yes, all 10 1/2 months left of it) needed to support an encyclopedia article at this time; but that isn't the question posed here. But assuming for the moment that Iris (software) merits an article, a brief notice of the developer in its article would not be out of order. Startup announcements from "Techie Buzz" and mobile phone application trade blogs do not establish significance on their own. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 18:19, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Abhishek Rawat

(Find sources: "Abhishek Rawat" – news · books · scholar · free images)

No indication of notability; unsourced BLP. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 04:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:22, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:23, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete Non notable BLP stub that is promotional.--MLKLewis (talk) 19:43, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Delete Non notable. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 15:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Keep - The light cleanup work I did proves that this actor meets WP:ENT, with Abhishek Rawat having, "had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." -CrazyHos12 (talk) 00:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B music ian 02:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep This search suggests that his career and roles are a subject of interest of important Indian media. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 12:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Keep - Article has improved greatly since its nomination. Also per Vejvančický, who made a good point. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Jannareddy

(Find sources: "Jannareddy" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Non-notable family made up of a list of non-notable people, sourced to a book which just says they exist at the place the article says they come from. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 21:04, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete - as per nomination. VasuVR (talk, contribs) 02:57, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wifione ^Message 04:44, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Debraj_Shome

(Find sources: "Debraj_Shome" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Not a notable person or acievements. There are many doctors out there with much better credentials. Haleyscomet2 (talk) 19:07, 23 January 2012 (UTC) — Haleyscomet2 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 January 23. Snotbot t • c » 19:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete Is an Autobiographycal try. Thundersport (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: Thundersport has been blocked as a sockpuppet of Paintballxtreme. Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 21:57, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 22:16, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete non-notable advert. - Frankie1969 (talk) 02:15, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Keep Nominator offers no valid rationale for deletion; the issue is not the subject's "credentials" but whether he satisfies Wikipedia criteria at WP:ACADEMIC or WP:BIO. He does NOT meet the academic standard; his publications are few and citations minimal. However, he appears to meet WP:BIO due to multiple articles about him in the Times of India [4] [5] [6] and other publications [7] [8]. I am uncomfortable that some of these articles tout unproven, unpublished technologies, but Wikipedia standards suggest that this degree of national publicity makes the subject notable, whether or not I approve of everything he does. MelanieN (talk) 18:34, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:24, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

(Comment: note that the nominator is an WP:SPA whose only contribution to Wikipedia has been to nominate this article for deletion. --MelanieN (talk) 03:26, 11 February 2012 (UTC))

Delete: Advertisement and non-notable. X*chemistry nerd (talk) 22:57, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Less/ not important at all, this article should be deleted. Anubhab91 (talk) 08:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Bihar Degree Dhoka (Hindi Film)

(Find sources: "Bihar Degree Dhoka (Hindi Film)" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Contested prod. Unreferenced promotional article for an unproduced and unreleased future film. No article for the filmmaker - film fails WP:MOVIE. Google search on "Bihar Degree Dhoka" shows only 36 unique results, none from reliable sources. Adding the -wiki modifier reduces that to only 12 results. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete per WP:TOOSOON. This can be undeleted or recreated once the film is made and gets coverage. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 21:47, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 01:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] N. S. Venkatakrishnan

(Find sources: "N. S. Venkatakrishnan" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Not Notable, Hardly any references, References are not reliable, Not neutral Veryhuman (talk) 17:50, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Delete As per nom --Anoopan (talk) 17:53, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 00:47, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wifione ^Message 04:31, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete Nothing to indicate biographical notability. AllyD (talk) 21:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Gautam Sanyal

(Find sources: "Gautam Sanyal" – news · books · scholar · free images)

being an elected local official does not guarantee notability per notability guidelines. Cloudz 679 16:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

___________________________________________________________

Gautam Sanyal is not an elected local or a national politician.
He is a member of the Indian Civil Service. The retirement age of a member of the civil service in India is 60 years old. Gautam Sanyal retired in 2011 as he turned 60 years old; however, he is the first civil servant or bureaucrat in India to head an Office of the Chief Minister of a state in India after retirement from his tenured service. (this is notability as first in recorded history).
Please read the following article then you will understand why he 'should have and has a' biography article in Wikipedia.
- (http://202.144.14.20/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&show=archive&id=388572&catid=35&year=2011&month=11&day=2&Itemid=66)
- (http://www.indianexpress.com/election-news/in-mayas-footsteps/880243).
- (http://m.timesofindia.com/PDATOI/articleshow/10504166.cms)
- (http://www.asianage.com/columnists/caught-loop-047) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.178.179.147 (talk) 18:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

_____________________________________________________________

Comment - A gnews search yields significant coverage in major Indian newspapers. Can be used to support and expand this article. MakeSense64 (talk) 18:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

_____________________________________________________________

This is true. I asked my fried to start this article. However I am in process to expand the article. But everyone has to wait for some time because it will take time. The article is just now in its infancy. I am on process to develop it more. Please remove the tag for deletion from this article. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.178.179.147 (talk) 18:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Merge to Mamata Banerjee All the 'find sources' GNews hits relate to the subject of the article, but none of the GBooks or GScholar ones do. Of the GNews hits, while many are passing mentions, quite a few, relating to controversy either about his original appointment to his current position (which does not seem to be automatically notable) or to its extension when he reached retirement age, are more substantial - but seem less concerned with the subject himself than with either with the precedents broken by his appointment or its extension or with Banerjee's insistence on appointing and then keeping him. In brief, he seems to have some notability under {{WP:GNG|]] - enough to justify a mention on Wikipedia - but all inherited from Banerjee. As a complicating factor, many of the GBooks hits and almost all of the GScholar ones seem to relate to a biochemist with AstraZeneca whose research publications would probably meet WP:PROF should anyone ever create an article on him. PWilkinson (talk) 12:23, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

_______________________________

I think there is no need to merge an individual biography to an another persons biography. There is the need to have a single source, legible biography article of 'Gautam Sanyal'. There is a reason for notability and why I created this article which many have either ignored or just skipping off. This is the notability as I mentioned with sources "The post of the Secretary to the Chief Minister of West Bengal" in the Chief Minister Office in West Bengal since India's Independence in 1947 has been held by officers of IAS cadre (All India Civil Service, Group A). However, Gautam Sanyal [officer of CSS cadre (Central Civil Service, Group A)] is the first one in recorded history to break this legacy and become the Secretary to CM.
- The point is - civil servants of central service usually go for deputation to an another state for few months or a single year for experience but not permanent posting. He likely is the first CSS officer, the first non IAS officer and the first retired civil servant who hold the post of Secretary. The post is considered to be the most powerful in the state of West Bengal. However, also civil servants in the state and even India has considered Sanyal to have more power and control than the Chief Secretary of the State. New poster boy of India’s babudom/civil service — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.178.186.242 (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 11:24, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:09, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Question; in the bad old days, senior civil servants were awarded state honours; Order of the Indian Empire/Order of the Star of India. Did India continue with this sort of thing? If so, what awards has he received? Is he covered in a Who's Who - style reference work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barney the barney barney (talk • contribs) 18:16, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete The argument for keep strikes me after straining for notability through a particular rare but not really notable career structure. DGG ( talk ) 01:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

DO NOT Delete DGG is wrong. The article "Gautam Sanyal" is a biography article. The article should exist and live by the virtue of the notability that he is one of the senior civil servants in India who is the most important officer in a state which the State Chief Minister has fought for from many of the civil servants who are allotted in the state and worked for whole their life who did not get the position he serves now.
- The reason why there is not a "career structure" in the article is because this is all the information I have of the person (I should point out that it is not because he has limited or no notable career experience and structure). Hence, the article has limited information with credible references. However, I am working to get as much information of the article on the person. You should see in coming days more references and information in the article.
- You should note that the article has references. I should point out that there are many articles (but not many and not all) in wiki which does not even have a reference and an external link but solely exists on the virtue and principle that the person is important in the state or the head of the government or bureaucracy. I think people should move out of double standards and search for more information on web. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.178.191.174 (talk) 01:04, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Automatic delete candidates

Find India related articles from Category:Proposed deletion or WP:PRODSUM and add here

(PROD-tagged) pages, culled from Category:Proposed deletion

Vodafone comedy stars (Asianet) (via WP:PROD on 17 November 2011)

for occasional archiving

[edit] Files for deletion

[edit] Category discussion debates

[edit] Template discussion debates

Template:Infobox Indian jurisdiction

[edit] Redirects for deletion

[edit] MFD discussion debates

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India

Contents

[edit] India

[edit] Raju Narayana Swamy

[edit] List of Songs by Mohammed Rafi

[edit] Dion Global Solutions Limited

[edit] Dehradun Institute of Technology

[edit] Sienna Biotec

[edit] List of international airports in India

[edit] First sanskrit Wikipedia seminar in Kerala

[edit] List of Pols in Ahmedabad

[edit] 2011 Bandra fire

[edit] Mukkuva kerala

[edit] Fact sheet on India

[edit] T. P. Sasikumar

[edit] Keerthi sagathia

[edit] Lokmanya nagar

[edit] Income Tax Department (Bangalore)

[edit] Jasmin Bhasin

[edit] Namassej Samaj Andolon

[edit] Him Ganga Hum

[edit] Dexetra

[edit] Abhishek Rawat

[edit] Jannareddy

[edit] Debraj_Shome

[edit] Bihar Degree Dhoka (Hindi Film)

[edit] N. S. Venkatakrishnan

[edit] Gautam Sanyal

[edit] Automatic delete candidates

[edit] Files for deletion

[edit] Category discussion debates

[edit] Template discussion debates

[edit] Redirects for deletion

[edit] MFD discussion debates

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

Actions

Search

Navigation

Interaction

Toolbox

Print/export