Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sujoy Banerjee

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. —SpacemanSpiff 05:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sujoy Banerjee[edit]

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

Previously a contested CSD. The sources, apart from they are poorly placed. The National Geographic sources are from the WP:COI user himself who is also the article creator, another is a Blogspot, India Today is merely a passing mention of the subject. The Bangor University source is 404. Other than that, there is only one legitimate source, that of Times of India regarding an award and the other is an official site for the award. Is it me or is it that this is scrapes through WP:GNG or just fails it, not helped is the COI nature of the article and ~~a 47.6% copyvio~~. Donnie Park (talk) 00:27, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Donnie Park: That copyvio is erroneous - it is them copying from here not the other way round (WP:BACKWARDSCOPY). SmartSE (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry abou tthat. Donnie Park (talk) 20:27, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Easily done. SmartSE (talk) 20:34, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 01:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 01:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete He isn't notable enough to pass WP:GNG, and this just reads like a promotional CV. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:24, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:24, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable, little coverage. VanEman (talk) 17:03, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the subject is certainly close to being notable but I think we need more sources. I did find more coverage of the award, a story about nature walks and many mentions e.g. [1] but I don't think these are quite enough to satisfy WP:BIO and the award is not sufficiently recognised to satisfy WP:ACADEMIC #3. SmartSE (talk) 20:34, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lacking in depth coverage to meet WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 09:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete at best for now as there's nothing convincingly better. SwisterTwister talk 07:37, 24 April 2016 (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.