Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/India: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Mereda (talk | contribs)
6,091 edits
Mereda (talk | contribs)
6,091 edits
m clear closed AfD Indus World School - nomination withdrawn
Line 30: Line 30:
==Ongoing deletion debates==
==Ongoing deletion debates==
:'''Deletion debates''' culled from [[WP:AFD]] and [[WP:MFD]]
:'''Deletion debates''' culled from [[WP:AFD]] and [[WP:MFD]]
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indus World School}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sachchiyamata}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sachchiyamata}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badarka}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badarka}}

Revision as of 09:45, 29 September 2006

Shortcut
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to India. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|India|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to India.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Purge page cache watch
Purge page cache

Automatic delete candidates

(PROD-tagged) pages, culled from Category:Proposed deletion

Dated: 28th September, 2006

Dated: 27th September, 2006

Dated: 26th September, 2006

Dated: 25th September, 2006

Ongoing deletion debates

Deletion debates culled from WP:AFD and WP:MFD
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 redirect and say prayer for cleanup. W.marsh 15:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sachchiyamata

This article has been nominated for delation because 1) its poor writing and numerous typos make it almost unreadable, and 2) the title word does not appear to exist on a Google search. Nehwyn 08:31, 28 September 2006 (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.
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 speedy keep, real town. Ganeshk (talk) 15:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Badarka

I want to clarify one thing, that prominent freedom fighter Chandrashekhar 'Azad' was born in Bhawra Tehsil of Jhabua district in Madhya Pradesh. It is a fact. His father Pandit Sitaram Tiwari had his roots in Badarka village. But it is wrong to mention here that Badarka is birth place of Chandrashekhar 'Azad'. Amod Bhagwat.

Nomination withdrawn by Vikas Kumar Ojha in comment below 21:50, 28 September 2006. --Mereda 06:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reasons for the Afd Nomination are the following:

  • This article is less than a stub. It is 25 words long. The article is too insignificant to be eligible for an entry as an article in Wikipedia.
  • It is mentioned that Chandrasekhar Tiwari alias Chandrasekhar Azad (Indian Freedom Fighter) was born in this village. Wikipedia article of Chandrasekhar Azad (and history, for that matter) says he was born in Bhawra (Jhabua, M.P.). Thus this article is in absolute contradiction with one of the articles in Wikipedia.
  • There is practically no information, no sources and no facts about the place other than its name. One cannot be sure if even that is correct.
  • No article links to this entry.

Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 22:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever the outcome of this discussion, I request the administrators to allow me to write an End note before the debate is closed. Thanks.--Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 11:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Exceptionally weak keep - it's usually held that any place with a name is notable, and I think this is the case regardless of size. That said, it would need to be verified to show that it actually does exist. BigHaz - Schreit mich an (Review me) 22:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Very difficult task. But we must also consider the incorrect claim to fame of the article.--Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 23:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment [http://www.liveindia.com/freedomfighters/chandrashekharazad.html

These] sources say that he was born in Badarka, but received his schooling in Bhawara. T REXspeak 23:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Your sources contradict each other. --Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 23:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: These sources say he was born in Bhawra/Bhavra (Jhabua, M.P.).--Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 00:05, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment, my rationale for the weak keep was based on the fact that the place exists and has a name (TruthbringerToronto backs this up). The dispute over whether a famous person was born there is immaterial, since a place is not only notable as a result of a famous person being born there. The location of the gentleman's birth would only be relevant if there were no indication that this village exists. BigHaz - Schreit mich an (Review me) 00:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The evidence (including a list of Central Excise and Service Tax Location Codes) provdes that the village exists and probaby was the birthplace of Chandrasekhar Azad. Could someone consult a printed atlas or gazeteer of India and add any relevant information to this article? Even the latitude and longitude would be helpful, as well as a list of the crops grown there. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 00:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The 'evidence' noted above (Central Excise and Service Tax Location Codes) lists Badarka as being a part of Azamgarh range. The article lists Badarka as being a part of Unnao District. Unnao belongs to Lucknow division, not Azamgarh Division. These two Badarkas can be entirely different or I may be wrong. Please clarify.--Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 07:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There seems to be a controversy as to the birthplace of Chandrasekhar Azad. You have provided one link on the Badarka page saying he was born in Badarka. I have provided three link (including Wikipedia article on Chandrasekhar Azad) which says he was not born in Badarka. The Badarka article notes that it is a small village searching its identification. Do you have hope of finding it in an Atlas?--Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 07:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Real place, some notability claimed. Length is no justification for deletion - I've seen articles less than half this size which should be kept. In fact, compared to a lot of the stub articles I've seen this is a pretty reasonable one. Grutness...wha? 06:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Sorry, the evidence of Badarka being a real place is still unproved. Even more disturbing is the incorrect 'claim to fame'. I don't think a 25 word article on a place whose existence is unknown/unproven should get a place in Wikipedia. I will be more than happy indeed if this Article can be expanded and some evidence included. Right now it is doing nothing but providing misinformation.--Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 07:58, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Response - for a village which may not exist, it gets quite a bit of press, especially from sources saying that it was Azad's birthplace, such as OneIndia News, India's National Congress Party, WebIndia123, OnlyPunjab.com, and [Central Chronicle. Several of these sites suggest that this mythical village was at the centre of centenary celebrations. Grutness...wha? 23:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Grutness, Please read Vikas's comment at the end of this AFD. He has voted for this article to be Speedy kept. - Ganeshk (talk) 00:01, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Mereda 07:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: No body asked how I came to know about this article if it was not linked anywhere. I came to know about it while investigating Vandalism by the creator of this Article. While this may be irrelevant, it is worth mentioning. Fellow debators are encouraged to checkout the page of Adiyakt and his Talk page. --Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 07:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. Wikipedia always keeps any location stub or article pending verifiability. Further, the burden of establishing verifiability is on the stub creator. I've done a Google search and come up with little. Maybe others could spend mroe time and verify that the town does exist. In that case I will change my stance. I would have taken the two references in the article to be legit, but there seems to be contradictory evidence on the location (and existence?) of this place per User:Vikas Kumar Ojha.--Antorjal 13:19, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong and Speedy Keep: The Varansi district government websites says the village exists and satisfies WP:V requirment for a reliable source. I don't understand why someone wants to delete a town article. Recently Ganguvarpatti went through the same process and Speedy Kept. - Ganeshk (talk) 16:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please provide link for Varansi district government websites that you have mentioned above, so that fellow debators can check your claim. Googled but could not find it. According to the article, Badarka is not in Varanasi district, but in Unnao. More over nobody wants to delete a town article. The article says it is a small village searching its identity. Show me that there is a Badarka in Unnao significant enough for a seperate article in Wikipedia and I will relent.--Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 19:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The link is in the article itself. It states Village:Badarka, District: Unno. If you visit varanasi.nic.in, it is the District of Varanasi's official website. - Ganeshk (talk) 20:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One more link. But then you would ask whether is reliable. :) - Ganeshk (talk) 20:17, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: No offence was intended in my comment Ganesh. :) --Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 21:50, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Following the lead of Ganeshk, I found the following page: District of Unnao Official Page: Famous Personalities. Although this page only says that Chandrasekhar Azad belonged to village Badarqa [sic] where his parental house still exists, it conclusively proves that at least the village exists. May be that is enough to keep the article in Wikipedia. This article still contradicts the Wikipedia article on Chandrasekhar Azad. I apologize to every Wikipedian for wasting their time spent on this Afd. I hope you will forgive me, taking into consideration my lack of experience in Wikipedia. I call it a Speedy Keep. Please let me know if anything additional needs to be done for this although, as far as I know, the Afd tags ar generally removed by the Administrators. Thanks.--Vikas Kumar Ojha Talk to me! 21:50, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep like the nominator says. Mereda 06:58, 29 September 2006 (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.
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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 17:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shahid Hussain Bokhari

NN comptuer science researcher. There are thousands of other similar nn researchers with similar credentials. --Ragib 19:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note to closing admin: Since this didn't have any discussion at all, it should be relisted to have more opinions. --Ragib 03:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - not with 34k + google hits and sites listed in ICASE, german, - Multiscale computing, Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Georgia Tech and the like. The article though, is in need of help.Bakaman Bakatalk 01:51, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Illinois Urbana-Champaign is a mailing list announcement about a talk. If I give a talk tomorrow (which I would within a few months), I'll be listed in the mailing list announcement as well. The "German" link you mention above is a bibliography site, and (I'm listed there as well) 5th year PhD students, newly hired Assistant professors have similar publications listed there. I do not see any crowning achivement listed in any of his biographies. That's the main point. To be notable, there must be something that distinguishes him from thousands and thousands of other professors, post docs, research scientists etc. --Ragib 02:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the large number of google hits occur because his first name and last names are very common. Narrow it down to "shahid bokhari", it gives out 571 hits. Google "Shahid H. Bokhari", it says 11k hits, but go to the 18th page, and the rest of the pages are duplicates. (Incidentally, now almost any one gets at last 8,000/9,000 hits (I myself get 9,000 hits in google). So, Google hits isn't really a measure of notability, unless they yield other results of notability. --Ragib 02:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That doesnt mean he is nn,. It means you are notable as well then.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does the "Highly Cited" link mean anything?Hornplease
The links for that is VERY dubious. I didn't find Knuth there, who is perhaps THE most famous computer scientist now. Most of the listings seem to have random people (number in several thousands), who are not notable in Computer Science at all. --Ragib 03:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 14:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete verifiability and notability issues. Ghits is much smaller (~350) when the exact phrase is employed. Eusebeus 15:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. To give perspective, there are a total of 320 computer scientists in the world on the ISI Highly Cited list. He's in that group. Also he is a fellow of both ACM and IEEE. In my opinion, this is notable. The article could certainly be written to better convey his contributions. E.g. the name of his best known paper. EdJohnston 14:31, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. notability established with highly cited. --Buridan 23:20, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

its not abt the talks that he gave or the google hits that he gets. There may be others that may have similar credentals as Dr Bokahri..but he has done some of the pioneering work in the field of parallel & distributed systems and computer architecture. He has over 1000 citations and as i recall, one of his papers had more than 300 citations... This amount of pioneering work and this many citations....are crowning achievemments... I am sure there wont be any newly appointed assistant professors...having over 1000 citations... FAHAD SAEED

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.
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. - Mailer Diablo 12:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SFMC

Non-notable per WP:ORG -Nv8200p talk 04:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or merge with VESIT. Non notable organisation.Obina 19:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No more notable than any other student organization at one school, of which there are millions. Fan-1967 22:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Mereda 07:16, 28 September 2006 (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.
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 keep. Daniel.Bryant 01:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

B. Sandhya

Highly non-notable, if every police officer deserves an article Wikipedia would be a collection of bureaucratic record Kuntan 09:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as she appears to be a high ranking officer. Being a published author helps too. A google search throws up some interesting hits, including mentions in The Hindu and the Deccan Herald. Article requires an extensive cleanup though. Stu ’Bout ye! 12:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment, I have (partially) wikified and sourced the article. Stu ’Bout ye! 13:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep- She is a very popular, highest ranking Police Officer. Hundreds of news paper reports and articles about her are currently available in any internet search engines.Any wikipedian can examine it. Adv. P. R. Bijuchandran 17:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep as articles such as this indicate she has a role akin to a deputy district attorney in the Indian state of Kerala. A prosecutor is more notable than a police officer. She's still not even the top cop in Kerala, though. --Dhartung | Talk 07:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Mereda 07:17, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Apart from her day job, there's media coverage of the subject as a published poet. I've added a reference to the article. Mereda 10:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - coverage in the Hindu cements notability.Bakaman Bakatalk 04:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. I have written elsewhere about a career civil servant not being notable purely for being a civil servant. However, as a DIG-level woman officer, and one covered for a notable extra-curricular activity, as it were, I suppose she makes the cut. Hornplease 09:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep Please note that an article about an IPS level officer with less credentials (no extra curricular activities and less rank) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/K._R._Kaushik was kept.  Doctor Bruno Talk 13:24, 30 September 2006 (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.
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 no consensus to delete. merge possible W.marsh 18:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DPS Dwarka

Though there is a website [1] of this School but looks like an Advertisment and unimportant to me. --Marwatt 13:25, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I was actually typing in a speedy delete notice when someone tagged it for deletion. Real school, sure, but fails Google test and article does not feature any remarkable facts. --Do Not Talk About Feitclub (contributions) 13:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - this is a significant school on an unusually large campus with national standard sports coaching. I have stubbed the article but see no reason to delete it. TerriersFan 00:16, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mangojuicetalk 13:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and Move Doesn't read at all like an ad to me, but it should be placed under it's full name instead of being abbreviated to DPS. Canadian-Bacon t c e 15:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I agree; if kept I intend to move it. TerriersFan 15:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to the main DPS article. Hornplease 09:18, 29 September 2006 (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.
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 no consensus. - Mailer Diablo 16:25, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Girls' High School and College

This article was prodded and deprodded: while it's possible the school is notable I can't see anything in the article itself to indicate that it is. Mark Grant 18:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete unless it can be expanded --Alex | talk / review me | 18:58, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, but rename correctly, because this cannot be the school's full title. Secondary schools generally meet the criteria to be kept. But, unless this one is given the correct title, it is actually nonsense. Fiddle Faddle 19:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Schools are inherently notable. Billy Blythe 19:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • thought You know the article as it stands needs rather a lot of work, especially renaming. I think it is a misjudgement to say that it is inherently notable as it stands. Fiddle Faddle 20:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I was going partly by the proposed WP:Schools policy, which it doesn't seem to meet based on any information included in the article: claiming that _any_ school is notable simply by existing seems silly to me. Mark Grant 23:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep. This school, like all other schools, is notable. We must not allow the Wikipedia project's most precious articles to be removed by deletionists. --ForbiddenWord 20:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment It seems absurd to me to claim that all schools are notable. Most statements of the form 'All X are Y' are easily disproven, and this one certainly seems to fit that bill. Valrith 20:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment FW, you make these claims again and again. You have thus far failed to give any reasoning behind the claim that all schools are notable nor have you somehow given any backing to your claim that these are somhow are "most precious articles." To be blunt the claim about the preciousness of these articles is ridiculous to anyone who works on this project on more than one area, and the totality of the statement "We must not allow the Wikipedia project's most precious articles to be removed by deletionists" is unecessarily divisive and uncivil. JoshuaZ 03:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have renamed this article so that it has a name now associated with Allahabad. Thsi will also allow better notability to be established. The prior name was too generic. Fiddle Faddle 20:58, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:SCHOOLS unless notability is established. —dustmite 23:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Remember WP:SCHOOLS is only a proposed guideline. --Alex | talk / review me | 12:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, but the main point is that nothing about this school makes it particularly unique (at least the way the article is written now). The guideline is just useful to cite. —dustmite 15:18, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but overhaul This can be justified, but the article doesn't yet do so.--Holdenhurst 15:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete NOT all schools are notable and this seems to be one that's not. Valrith 20:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Mereda 10:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep High schools are notable and articles about schools outside the developed English speaking countries are especially welcome in Wikipedia. Piccadilly 22:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I have some minimal sympathy that post-seconday education has inherent notability to it, but if anything were a counterexample to that claim, this would be it. We don't have independent sources about the school, the school has no notable alumni nor anything else that makes it in any way anything different from 1000s of other schools. JoshuaZ 03:16, 29 September 2006 (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.
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 per failure of WP:BIO and WP:VAIN. --Nishkid64 00:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anand Narayanan

Non-notable editor; fails both the WP:BIO and WP:VAIN criteria. Google shows around only 33 relevant Google results--TBCTaLk?!? 23:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. I think that some of those results actually refer to another person with the same name.--Húsönd 01:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Obvious vanity. Author and IP have also posted contact info (cell phone, email, etc.) to this page and Anand, which I've removed. --NMChico24 02:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. wikipediatrix 04:08, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. —Jared Hunt September 25, 2006, 05:22 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and own research. - Richfife 05:39, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Although the difference in country might be somewhat skewing, I still don't see an editor as notable if he or she has not done anything that would make them otherwise notable. AdamBiswanger1R.I.P. Steve Irwin 13:36, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Non-notable, thoroughly ridiculous article.UberCryxic 19:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, fails the everything test. RFerreira 04:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Mereda 07:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Week Keep- How a non-notable person can become the senior editor of a reputed channel.I think he may be notable. But the contributor of the article must provide sufficient links and sources inorder to prove his notability.Adv. P. R. Bijuchandran 14:08, 29 September 2006 (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.
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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vidya Shilp Academy

Copyright infringement, attacks and nonsense will be deleted without warning. Please check your factual data before posting - Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raveeta (talk • contribs) 09:17, 25 September 2006

  • Keep. This is a private school in India. I improved the article. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 15:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Schools are not inherently notable. No sources, no claims of notability. AmitDeshwar 01:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It doesn't matter if it's a private school in Victoria or not - it fails the notability test. Ultra-Loser Talk Comparison of BitTorrent sites 09:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Private schools tend to attract students with influential parents. Are we sure this school had no famous alumni? - Mgm|(talk) 10:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's a primary school that was founded less than ten years ago. I can't imagine any reasons for keeping it. Aside: the "famous alumni" criterion for the newly proposed WP:SCHOOLS is idiotic. Because Omarosa went to some elementary school, that school deserves an article? -- Kicking222 14:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Truthbringer accurately alerted me to the fact that this is not merely a primary school. Taking that into consideration, I stand by my previous opinions. -- Kicking222 15:20, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. It is an all-grades school, not a primary school. "Vidyashilp Academy is ... committed to providing primary and secondary school education in the global context." Since it includes secondary grades, it is therefore notable. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 15:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. per nom --Bill.matthews 15:43, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Mereda 07:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, notable to the community of Bangalore, India. And TruthbringerToronto has done excellent work refactoring this article. bbx 23:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per bbx and TruthbringerToronto. --Myles Long 23:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per bbx.  ALKIVAR™ 00:03, 1 October 2006 (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.
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. - Mailer Diablo 17:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prem Nair

Non-notable, vanity? Xiong Chiamiov :: contact :: 15:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Mereda 07:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, unless evidence of notability can be provided. Nothing in the article suggests notability, Google results in little of relevance save wiki mirrors, and both external links are now non-functional. Espresso Addict 03:07, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It stinks. Reading the article I missed information if they had a puppy and what it is called.Kuntan 04:49, 30 September 2006 (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.
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 keep. Daniel.Bryant 02:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strides Arcolab

delete - NN UtherSRG (talk) 17:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, I don't agree with the nominator's finding of non-notability. Gazpacho 19:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, article needs to be expanded though. IrfanAli 20:11, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obviously, the nominator is using the common-sense real-world understanding of notability. There are tens of thousands of dull and marginal niche corporations like this who will eternally be unknown to 99 percent of the world's population. However, here in Wikipedia-land, companies like this are deemed "notable" by WP:CORP, so unfortunately, I have no choice but to vote Keep. wikipediatrix 20:27, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, Definately notable , a listed company with operations over several continents . Shyamsunder 08:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Mereda 07:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: This page should be kept because the company is notable and one of the fastest growing indian pharma company
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.
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. - Mailer Diablo 16:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aruna gaur

Indian village mayor who lost some elections on a provincial and/or national level. Fails WP:BIO, unsourced. Her non-governmental efforts might be notable, but I could not verify them. Prod removed by anon without improvement. Delete. Huon 09:54, 20 September 2006 (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.
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. - Mailer Diablo 15:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Ayranikudy

non notable Kuntan 18:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I dunno. It says that he published a book of poetry and a "famous" research book. There's not a shred of verification, though. If he did do those things, his notability would depend on how popular his poems and his research were. But who can tell? Not I. Herostratus 19:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • very weak keep let's be careful here. How do we know he's not notable? I'd like to hear some confirmation by someone familiar with the Malayalam language or at least someone very familiar with the litterature of India. Here's a source that mentions him [4]. Now of course I have absolutely no way of knowing whether that site is just rewriting from Wikipedia content so that does not say much. Still I think a bit of research is needed before we go ahead and throw this away. Pascal.Tesson 21:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment tried to do more research. I have to say I find no trace of this guy or his books but again I'm not entirely convinced this means much. I guess I'll change my vote to very weak delete unless someone can come up with some sort of reference21:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak delete per nom and Pascal.Tesson. Notability is definitely not established in the article. --Antorjal 14:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I proposed the article for deletion. There are hundreds of such poetasters in every land. If you are going to put everyone of them in an encylopedia, it would be a compendium about Tom, Dick and Harry. I am fairly familiar with the literary world of Kerala and I never heard of such a poet. Kuntan 14:31, 19 September 2006 (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.
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 NO CONSENSUS TO DELETE. I count 12-6 in favor of Keep, but I didn't close as Keep in spite of the numbers because the argument that the list is and has been shown to be unmaintainable is the strongest argument made in my opinion.

List of famous Nairs

Wikipedia is not a directory; The persons listed here have not "significantly contributed to the list topic" . Their contributions are in other fields and this list merely traces the caste they belong to. It is not known wheteher everyone listed here would like to be listed as members of a particular caste or whether they consider themselves to be members of a particular caste.Clt13 09:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep, but it needs heavy editing. I'd say you've unearthed a pretty good collection of related articles that need to be either reworked or deleted, but the list itself (with some work) seems OK. On its face it doesn't seem any different from, say, List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people (which as far as i know is an acceptable page), but there is one difference: Most, or maybe all, of the people on the Nair list are probably unknown to English speakers and are not notable enough to have even more than a few paragraphs attributed to their articles. (I mean if you click most of those links, they're stubs that offer no explanation as to the notability of the individual, and even some of those that do have serious POV issues.) So i guess my suggestion is two-fold: (1) Go through and get rid of all the non-notable people in the list (there are a couple, but apparently not many); and (2) order it by name, not 'major area of work'. I don't know enough about India to do the former myself though. ~ Lav-chan 09:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. If you order it by name, you might as well turn it into a category. ColourBurst 22:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Lav-chan Doctor BrunoTalk 18:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep, but "unknown to English speakers" does not mean nonnotability. eg Li Bai is relatively unknown to English speakers, but is still notable enough to have an article. ColourBurst 22:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep interesting concept, needs a bit of cleanup though. —ExplorerCDT 22:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per lav-chan --Ageo020 03:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It is pure patent nonsense. Nobody can verify the entries in the list. It is casteiest and very ofen self promotional. In many cases the listed people are those who have denounced their caste origins. It makes it doubly nonsensical. Kuntan 07:22, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There was an Afd discussion last year at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Famous Nairs. Being a newbie and less cynical than I am now, I argued vociferously to keep that article. For a few months, I tried to keep the list sane, failed utterly and even got abused by a few drive-by editors. I can say from my personal experience that there is no way this list can be verified, or names restricted only to those who are famouse because every other editor who passes by adds names of his choice. Tintin (talk) 08:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a nonsense article based on casteist bias,and most of these people listed have not made any contribution to socail life

  • Delete. The title is List of Famous Nairs yet 90% do not have their own page, and it is completely unreferenced considering the title is potential non-NPOV Todd661 11:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, Wikipedia should not participate in the perpetuation of the racist and discriminatory caste system. The other lists of famous caste members should be deleted as well. Wikipedia should record history, not participate in it, as far as its actual content goes. The problems mentioned by Tintin, Clt13 and Todd661 are additional reasons for deleting the list. -- Kjkolb 12:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Nair as in the case of Syrian_Malabar_Nasrani-Bharatveer 13:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep - Requires heavy editing. -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 14:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or merge to Nair after removing all of the unsourced red links. Yamaguchi先生 23:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment.We should check whether this list serves any purpose at all. If you go to the List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people and the pages linked from there, you can see that in most of the pages there is a mention of the person being a gay / lesbian. The person was famous as a gay /lesbian as well. Here most of the Nairs mentioned are not famous as a Nair. Of course it could be argued that it is a fact. Then there are many such facts and people here can be put in any of the 2000 cast wise lists, 500 District wise lists, and so on. The point is whether it is relevant. Of course, we have lists like List of Muslim actors, etc. If these lists justify the presence of List of famous Nairs, we should debate the relevance of the policy WP:NOT ("having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic"). I think that should be one of the criteria for a list and we can start the deletions at List of famous Nairs as it serves no purpose other than being a breeding ground for many non-notable, unverifiable and often fictitious Nair “biographies”. This may not be applicable to lists like List of Muslim scientists which is related to Islamic science or list of members of a community / cast who contributed something to the “cast cause” or identified with that cast.Clt13 07:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am certain none of these people were famous for being Nairs or whatever. Caste identities of people have been banned by law and hence this list should be deleted- Manu

Banned!!. The Union Ministers still have their caste name behind them Doctor BrunoTalk 01:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - The concept is sound as per the List of Muslim actors, List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people, etc. However, it needs serious NPOV'ing, cleaning-up, and verification. Whether these people have denounced their caste origins or not - that is irrelevant. It is simply a list. I am not sure about serving to "further" casteist agendas or whatever. At the very least, it is a list of people. I would have said Keep had the article been better written. --Vivin Paliath (വിവി൯ പാലിയത്)

  • Comment: I do not think that the comparisons given are appropriate. A list of famous caste members contributes to the perpetuation of racism and discrimination, but a list of Muslim actors does not. A person's caste should not even be mentioned in an article unless there is a reason to, such as experiencing discrimination that shaped the person's life. Wikipedia should not help, in any way or any amount, to preserve the idea that some people are better than others due to the caste they are born into. I think that part of the lack of objection to the list is that people would probably not mind being included on a list of Nairs very much, whereas being on a list of untouchables would probably be undesirable to many people. However, if we do not have a list of untouchables because it is undesirable and racist, we should not have lists of higher castes. -- Kjkolb 17:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I do think the comparison is appropriate. Having a list of Nairs doesn't do anything to further "racism" or "discrimination". There is "racism" and "discrimination" on the basis of religion alone in many places. Being a member of a caste doesn't automatically mean you stand for discrimination or racism on that basis. I am a Nair, and I am proud of the heritage and culture behind that fact. I also acknowledge the various excesses and illogic behind caste rules and needless to say I think they are stupid. So how am I furthering "discrimination"? Identifying yourself or identifying someone as being from a caste is just that - identification. There is no agenda. --Vivin Paliath (വിവി൯ പാലിയത്) 16:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep- the article is very informative. giving informations on any subject under the sun is the increases the relevance and scope of an encyclopedia. Some editing may be needed. then do it. Actually i'm a Christian. But i can tolerate and respect other Castes and creeds.. Add more and more informations in wikipedia. Rosalinta 17:16, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you care to have details of the spouses and offspring and pets and pet peeves of these famous people, as well? Kuntan 08:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Comment As I mentioned above, it is tough to maintain this article because of the many unimportant and unverified entries and too many drive-by editors (See Edit history). Can any of the people who voted to save the article volunteer to keep it clean ? I hope the responsibility doesn't end with the vote. Tintin (talk) 04:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This debate would become very constructive, if the participants base the arguments on wikipedia policies. We are not making any value judgments or taking moral stand points. The aim is to discuss whether this list is acceptable as an article in wikipedia, wikipedia policies regarding this and also practical considerations in implementing them. Arguments like "giving informations on any subject under the sun is the increases the relevance and scope of an encyclopedia." are in fact against the policies. See WP:NOT(Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information)Clt13 11:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but rename to "List of Nairs".Bakaman Bakatalk 04:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Strong Keep- Most of the persons got enlisted in the list of famous Nairs have incomparable contributions to the social life. Political leader Jaya Jaitly is the nephew of C.Sankaran Nair. (How many of us know that the National level leader and former M.P Jaya Jaitly is a Malayali...?). It was new information to me which I recieved from Nairs List. I have just picked a sample of valuable information. Many freedom Fighters and social reformers are enlisted in the list of famous Nairs. Are they not famous enough...? The next generation will tell that Gandhiji is not famous enough as model John Abraham or Aiswarya Rai. Somebody may ask who is Mannathu Padmanabhan...? I know only Sreesanth and Munaf Patel! Adv. P. R. Bijuchandran 04:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is precisely the point. Most of us know Jaya Jaitly (she is notable and so there should be a page on her) but not as a Nair, not as some one born at a particular hour of day, not as some one who keeps a particular pet, not as some one who frequents this particular restaurant, not as some one whose house number starts with *, etc. All such lists are irrelevant.Clt13 05:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep- This item is much relevant in the present context.Several novel information which are not known to many can be made open for the generation.Parayanali 17:04, 26 September 2006 (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.

Categories for deletion

Dated: 24th September, 2006

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/India&oldid=78473386"