Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trishneet Arora

Trishneet Arora

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

Article has apparently been created by subject of the article, going by the username which is a single purpose self-promotion account (WP:SPA)
The only other significant contributors to this article even 3 weeks after creation are multiple IPs. Promotional content added by these IPs has been reverted by other editors
Notability (WP:GNG) is questioned despite apparent references in newspapers since these are online editions limited to a single city. The book apparently written by the subject is not available in online stores.
A similar article had earlier been CSD'd[1]

Sesamevoila (talk) 08:03, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IP has also removed the AfD template Sesamevoila (talk) 08:22, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

it will be release this month you can read news paper articles he said it will be release in this September. and Attrition.org is also uploaded about him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.207.251 (talk • contribs) -- page unblanked & comment moved by Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 08:57, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 September 28. Snotbot t • c » 08:26, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. No opinion either way, but I did do a cleanup of the article and removed some sources that wouldn't be seen as usable as reliable sources per Wikipedia. I tried to smooth the grammar out somewhat as well as remove some of the peacock language. (This is language that can be seen as overly promotional or flattering to the subject, in this case the author.) Again, no opinion either way.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:27, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 17:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 17:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 17:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comment. I've left a message on the original editor's page explaining a bit about the template for AfD, but I also wanted to post this link to YouTube here: [2] It's not the official news site so we can't link to it in the article, but I did want to show that there's been some television coverage. Much of the coverage for Arora seems to be relatively recent, but there's quite a bit of it. I'm not as familiar with sources in India so I'm still abstaining for the moment, but again- there's a lot of it.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 17:46, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No "significant coverage". WP:NOTNEWS: He being a 18-year old hacker is covered as newspapers as one-off news. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 04:54, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He has been the primary subject of articles by multiple Reliable Source publications - and that's even before his book comes out. He is clearly regarded as something of a phenomenon in India. --MelanieN (talk) 21:49, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Redtigerxyz. --regentspark (comment) 02:48, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 09:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In-depth coverage in so many secondary sources makes this topic clearly notable. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^Talk ^Email 13:12, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It might be somewhat in depth, but as mentioned above it's one off. Just because I get a mention in a newspaper once, doesn't particularly make me notable. Even if I claim to be writing a book. (crystal ball perhaps?) I can't find any sources on the book other than a brief mention in the sourced newspapers. As Carrite mentions below, it seems self-promo. I think wait until the book hits the shelves, or there's more coverage. Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 16:37, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Sourcing relates to the novelty of a young hacker writing a new book. The piece is essentially self-promotional in intent. I wish him well and hope he sells lots of copies, invents a killer app, whatever — but this one doesn't clear the GNG bar, in my estimation. Carrite (talk) 16:01, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete self promo, concerns with notability. One-off news paper article doesn't cut it. Wait for the book to be released or more coverage, imo Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 16:49, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per Redtigerxyz and Carrite. Everyone can become an ethical hacker, write a book, or found a startup company. Sure, he may be rather young at his age, but as long as neither his book nor his company becomes notable he isn't notable either by our policies. Nageh (talk) 15:44, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – because this individual passes WP:BASIC and has received significant coverage in reliable sources. Period. Some source examples include [3], [4], [5], [6]. Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:50, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The sources pretty much come down to WP:1E regarding publication of the individual's (upcoming) book. The notability, reliability, and independence of [7] seems questionable, and the fact that a link is given to this non-text-searchable e-paper source has a smell of self-promotion. Let's wait for established notability. Or in the individual's own words: "Even though people might not know about me, but my company would be among the respected companies in the next few years, he says." Let's see. Nageh (talk) 09:08, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – I want to tell that this guy is so young and written a book it is proud for all we should be appreciated and he is listed in list of Ethical Hakcers page of wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_hacker#List_of_White_Hat_Hackers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.116.180 (talk) 10:39, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Here is link of Wikipedia posted about him in list of computer security experts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_security#Notable_people_in_computer_security — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.189.131 (talk • contribs)
- Unaccountable (and possibly duplicate) vote. This was an arbitrary list of mostly (self-declared) hackers (and not of security experts), recently added by your geographical area and within an Indian class B IP subnet who spammed the link to multiple articles across Wikipedia. The list has now been removed. Nageh (talk) 13:53, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep We should appreciate him self because he had done so good work at early age you can think about him he is just 18 and written book on cyber crime its amazing i think so but we should keep this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.161.143.158 (talk) 19:41, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – we have to keep this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.181.104 (talk • contribs)
Comment tonne of apparent sockpuppetry / meatpuppetry from IP editors commenting here. Continuosly stating 'keep' without a proper argument isn't going to help you, this isn't a !vote it is consensus. Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 08:33, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also going to leave this diff here. In the case this gets deleted, his name should be removed from here. Even if it stays I'm not sure if he's important enough to warrant a listing for births Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 08:36, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – I want to know the reason why you want to Delete dear, this is useful information for all and this guy is so popular so what to do just tell me this thanks