Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miki Agrawal

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. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 07:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Miki Agrawal

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

Fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:V guidelines. WP:GNG states "The evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition". Out of the 5 references used for this page, reference 1 is from the website of the person the article is about, reference 2 is from a speaking company that represents the person the article is about, reference 3 is from a very small online publication and reference 4 and 5 are the same link to a harpercollins page for a book that has yet to be released. There are not enough secondary sources as per WP:GNG. Furthermore, majority of the article cites to reference 2 which comes from a biased source and therefore does not meet the WP:V guidelines. Fort Du Quesne (talk) 15:46, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete — Not a notable person. Its seems that the page is created for self and business promotion. Jussychoulex (talk) 21:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 09:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's some media coverage about her and her pizzeria[1][2][3][4]. However I'm not sure whether it quite establishes notability of either her or the pizzeria. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:19, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I do not think that press on one restaurant would establish notability for its owner. Otherwise there would be plenty of articles on small restaurant owners based simply on some press for the restuarant even if it was one small relatively unknown establishment. That was nice of you to add those references however.Fort Du Quesne (talk) 18:51, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 09:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I believe all comments leaned in favor of deletion. I vote for deletion not sure how to reach a consensus though. All issues were covered in previous comments as to why I proposed deletion in the first place.Fort Du Quesne (talk) 02:57, 9 March 2013 (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.