Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vijay Pravin Maharajan

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:37, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vijay Pravin Maharajan

[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)

The article fails of meeting the criteria outlined in WP:GNG. The majority of sources within the article primarily consist of interviews and sources associated with PR, lacking substantial or noteworthy coverage. Additionally, a significant portion of these sources do not provide proper authorship attributions. Furthermore, certain sources, like The Logical Indian, are considered unreliable. The deletion log indicates that the article has been deleted on multiple occasions due to being perceived as unambiguously promotional or advertising-oriented. Akshithmanya ^talk 11:08, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Akshithmanya ^talk 11:08, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:43, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject is notable and shouldn't be considered for deletion, having references on many Wikipedia independent reliable sources including CNN-News18, The Economic Times, Business Wire India and lots more. Kasuabakin (talk) 08:24, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
None of these sources provide information about this individual. They all appear to be promotional articles related to cryptocurrencies. It would be helpful if you could specify which sources are actually offering substantial coverage of the person in question. Akshithmanya ^talk 03:44, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This user has only made less than 70 edits so far.Akshithmanya ^talk 03:44, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no minimum level of activity an editor must have before voicing an opinion in an AFD. Some editors' first edit is in an AFD. What's more important is the argument they are making, not their edit count. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:31, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom Worldiswide (talk) 03:52, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Main sources has PR materials in it. No mention of this person can be found in any reputable sources. 111.92.123.60 (talk) 17:58, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't think the participants' arguments are very strong and would appreciate a source analysis.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: My source analysis is as follows. 1st 2nd and 3rd sources are about his company bitscrunch. 4th source has no content. It is just titled as stories by author. 5th and 6th one are about cryptocurrencies. 7th one is a promotional interview. 8th one is a video of his speech on Tedx. 9th one is interview. 10th looks almost good. But it is solely focused on his company bitscrunch. 11th one is entirely about something else. 12th one has some mention. 13th one is from Behindwoods which is known for its promotional content about celebrities. 14th is interview. 15th, 16th, 17th as well as 18th is about his company and cryptocurrency. 19th one dont even mention anything about him. 20th one is a promotional press releass without any byline of the author. 21st one is one among the many websites that lists net worth of celebrities. So from these it is clear that the subject fails GNG criteria. 116.68.101.233 (talk) 19:20, 12 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.