Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 November 2

2 November 2023

Annamalai Kuppusamy

Annamalai Kuppusamy (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

The article was created by somebody in 2020 and was proposed for deletion within weeks on the ground that the article fails the WP:NPOL and WP:BLP1E criteria and was deleted after discussion.

It seems not very unfair to delete the page at that point since he was just another IPS officer leaving service and joining a political party. Though it is very much evident that, he is more notable and not like every other hundreds of IPS officers as he was different and was famous. He recieves unusual media coverage atleast locally. But that doesn’t qualify enough to pass the WP:NPOL and WP:BLP1E criterias. Also the article presented then was more in a promotion tone. There was also a title conflict since there is another person with the name K.Annamalai. The nominator of the AFD himself “suggest to delete the article for now and wait till anything develops reason being wikipedia is not a soapbox and biographical host for every person” Consensus reached to delete the article ‘atleast temporarily’.

BUT, things had changed substatially over time. He was appointed as the state vice-president of the Bharatiya Janata Party and was promoted as the State President a year later. From day 1 in his office until now, he is been in the headlines of leading, reputed Tamil and English, newspapers and electronic media in Tamil Nadu 24x7x365. He even reaches national headlines frequently. It could be verified online here [1][2][3][4][5]

Tamil, Malayalam,hindi and Kannada Wikipedias already has artilce on him and the traffic for the page in Tamil wikipedia gets 5 to 7 times the views on an average when compared to the article on the previous president L. Murugan, even though he is a union minister.

I am elobrating all these things just to reflect upon his increased notability over time. Now the WP:NPOL criteria is met and he does not fit into the WP:BLP1E category.

Even though the name space Annamalai.K is been already created for a former ‘1-time-MLA’ who was elected in 2001 and was very little notable comparably. Yet he was argued to be an elected representative. Apart from that he was nowhere near to ‘Annamalai Kuppusamy’ (whom we are discussing about) in the notability scale. (This is another discussion)

For the argument that the tone of the then article is promotional, I have a different version which shall be uploaded (again it shall be discussed).

For the citations – There are already tens of hundreds of news articles available on him. We will be able to add fare references from reputed sources readily.

So it is very much unfair not to have a page in English Wikipedia on him now. - Vaikunda Raja:talk: 06:06, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

• I would suggest the deleted content be restored to draft so that the new/additional information the nominator has mentioned can be added and the article transferred back to mainspace. Stifle (talk) 09:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

  Based on the excellent submissions of Cryptic I now suggest keep deleted and list at WP:DEEPER. Stifle (talk) 12:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

  A DEEPER listing isn't warranted, I don't think; it hasn't been to DRV before so far as I recall. And we actually might want to unsalt someday, despite the best efforts of this person's promoters, if someone presents evidence from reliable sources that don't accept payment in exchange for coverage. —Cryptic 12:44, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

  I have been noticing for some time that the namespace Annamalai is being created/drafted by somebody and was deleted by others. These issues was going on again and again and I wondered then that why such a personality like him does not deserves a page here. Anyway I moved on as I’ve witnessed similar arguments multiple times in the past on different spaces. I thought those things would be settled in a week or month by the people who are involved since an article on a personality like Annamalai is inevitable with every standards of Wikipedia. I am not involved with the topic any time earlier; BUT 3 years later, a page was still not available on such a notable personality! Mr.Annamalai is one among the key people around whom the politics of Tamilnadu revolves around continiously for the last couple of years. As a resident/native of Tamil Nadu I personally experience this. That’s why I am here now.

  The vigor with which the page was created again and again seems discourteous. But I assume, that was made by different people at different points of time. Most of the Ids which was attempting the creation of this particular page appears inexperienced, and was not familiar to Wikipedia. They are pretty unfamiliar with the regulations and norms of Wikipedia which literally goes into hundreds of pages. But see how rudely the issue was handled on the other side; by people Who has years of experience in Wikipedia. They keep on deleting on the other end without paying little or no attention to understand the crucz of the issue. Also, citing the behavior of some beginners does not warrant an indefinite denial of an article on a person with such notability.

  User:Cryptic opinioned that "especially on such flimsy evidence as google searches, other Wikipedias, and the Times of India."

  I repeat,once again

  He was the state vice-president of the Bharatiya Janata Party, (one among the largest political party in India) and was promoted as the State President, (of a state with a population of over 80 million) a year later.From day 1 in his office until now, he is been in the headlines of leading, reputed Tamil and English, newspapers and electronic media in Tamil Nadu 24x7x365. He even reaches national headlines frequently. It could be verified online here [6][7][8][9][10]. Tamil, Malayalam,hindi and Kannada Wikipedias already has artilce on him and the traffic for the page in Tamil wikipedia gets 5 to 7 times the views on an average when compared to the article on the previous president L. Murugan, even though he is a union minister.

  This is not about citing a random news from a random newspaper. They are news articles from leading reputed newspapers, The Times of India, The Hindu, Hindustan Times, The New Indian Express etc. I had ran searches focusing only on English dailies. There are a dozen regional language news articles also. Those above newspapers carries not one or two articles on Annamalai; But hundreds of articles each in the last 1 year alone. Again these are not some random newspapers. For example, 'Times of India' is the largest circulated English daily in the world. 'The Hindu' is the second most circulated English-language newspaper in India. These are all flimsy...!? Additionally, he also has more than half a million social media followers. If such a person does not qualify notability I would like to ask humbly to User:Cryptic, who has 15+ years experience in Wikipedia to " Define Notability"

  I would like to suggest experienced users here to act responsibly. - Vaikunda Raja:talk: 14:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

• Also afd'd independently at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annamalai k, and the draft was mfd'd more recently at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Annamalai Kuppusamy. There's an existing draft at Draft:K. Annamalai (BJP politician), which I'm sorely tempted to G4 based on the mfd. Deleted at least 27 times in mainspace and 43 in draft. Do not unsalt or restore even to draft, especially on such flimsy evidence as google searches, other Wikipedias, and the Times of India.
  Note that there's a different K. Annamalai (AfD discussion) who is notable, and whose page was hijacked for this person so frequently it had to be indefinitely ec-protected. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KM. Annamalai is also apparently about someone else. —Cryptic 12:19, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

  Times of India is the largest circulated English daily in the world. The Hindu is the second most circulated English-language newspaper in India. These news dailies has literally hundreds of articles which reports/covers Annamalai. These are all flimsy...!? If such a person does not qualify notability I would like to ask humbly to User:Cryptic, who has 15+ years experience in Wikipedia to " Define Notability" and define “Reliable resource”.

  What do you mean by "evidence from reliable sources that don't accept payment in exchange for coverage." Please act responsibly- Vaikunda Raja:talk: 14:35, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Miles Routledge

Miles Routledge (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

A previous deletion review recommended allowing recreation; however, I'm requesting restoration of the original article. There is a draft pending at Draft:Miles Routledge, and I'd like to have the original article back with its old edit history so that the draft at AfC can be combined into it. Dan Leonard (talk) 01:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)