Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trishneet Arora (3rd nomination): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 05:43, 9 April 2021

Trishneet Arora

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Most links are dead and the last AfD wasn’t properly addressed, the awards and funding related sections clearly depict Promotional work, the subject is a forbes 30 u 30 holder but that doesn’t make him notable as these awards are very manipulative. Posting it up here for a discussion. -- Jammumylove Talk to me or ^{CHECK MY RECENT WORK} 01:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- Jammumylove Talk to me or ^{CHECK MY RECENT WORK} 01:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- Jammumylove Talk to me or ^{CHECK MY RECENT WORK} 01:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- Jammumylove Talk to me or ^{CHECK MY RECENT WORK} 01:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There are multiple WP:RS news articles over a period of 2 years which easily makes the subject notable. This might require cleanup. But AFD is not a venue for cleanup. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 03:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article lists 20 sources. All live, or available as archives ("Most links are dead", c'mon). The nominator has not addressed any of these and is making specious and weak arguments. What source, specifically, is a problem? Why? The coverage is real and significant in many reliable sources. Previous AfDs have been riven with socks and canvassing on both sides, including the nominator of the last one who got blocked during the AfD. The noms claim of "manipulative" is unsupported. -- GreenC 03:24, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- GreenC, I’ve already addressed it at the talk page, when no one replied i raised it to AfD. -- Jammumylove Talk to me or ^{CHECK MY RECENT WORK} 05:43, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 *'''Keep''': There are multiple [[WP:RS]] news articles over a period of 2 years which easily makes the subject notable. This might require cleanup. But AFD is not a venue for cleanup. [[User:Kashmorwiki|Kichu]]🐘 <sup>[[User talk:Kashmorwiki|<i style="color:green">Need any help?</i>]]</sup> 03:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 *'''Keep'''  The article lists 20 sources. '''All live, or available as archives''' ("Most links are dead", c'mon). The nominator has not addressed any of these and is making specious and weak arguments. What source, specifically, is a problem? Why? The coverage is real and significant in many reliable sources. Previous AfDs have been riven with socks and canvassing on both sides, including the nominator of the last one who got blocked during the AfD. The noms claim of "manipulative" is unsupported.  -- [[User:GreenC|<span style="color: #006A4E;">'''Green'''</span>]][[User talk:GreenC|<span style="color: #093;">'''C'''</span>]] 03:24, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
+** {{u|GreenC}}, I’ve already addressed  it at the talk page, when no one replied i raised it to AfD. -- ''[[User:Jammumylove|<span style="font-variant:small-caps; color:coral">Jammumylove</span>]]'' <small> [[User talk:Jammumylove#top|Talk to me or]]</small> <sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/Jammumylove|CHECK MY RECENT WORK]]</small></sup> 05:43, 9 April 2021 (UTC)