English Wikipedia @ Freddythechick:Articles for deletion/Natthan Singh

Add links
From English Wikipedia @ Freddythechick
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. I have discarded non-policy based keep votes and having done that the delete side is clearty stronger and the policy based deleteion arguments have not been refuted. Since this is a BLP I also consider that there is less space then usual to exercise discretion in countering systemic bias so the overall outcome from this discussion is clear. Spartaz Humbug! 05:25, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Natthan Singh

Natthan Singh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) –

Non-notable biography of a living person - lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. PhilKnight (talk) 13:29, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Delete as under-sourced WP:BLP, unless rescued by addition of non-trivial independent sources. Guy (Help!) 16:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep This scholar has apparently authored over 15 books and edited more. The fact that the person wrote in Hindi and other languages makes it hard, currently, for the deletion nominator to find information about this person. Deletion is too harsh and would seem to be an example of anti-Hindi or English-centric bias. --doncram (talk) 17:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep and Keep. — Duplicate !vote: Doncram (talk • contribs) has already cast a !vote above. Also, i see that deletion of this article was previously discussed at the article's talk page. Comments from there:

Proposed deletion of Natthan Singh article is not justified because the only cause for deletion proposed is - "A search for reliable sources found nothing that could establish notability. I could not find anything online about the reference cited in the references section."

It is to be noted here that author is a Hindi language writer who has written a number of books on literature as listed in the article itself. I do not think that a writer of English can only be a criteria for notability. Hindi language on internet is still in offing and in due time we will find searchable references in Hindi also. We find references on internet about books written by him. As such I strongly recommend not to delete.burdak (talk) 03:06, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed with above viewpoint of LRBurdak, it should'nt be deleted, bases of proposed deletion itself are not justified...-- Last Emperor (talk) 11:58, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The cause for deletion may have since been expanded or otherwise changed, but the opposition of these two editors probably still applies perfectly well, so please consider these as two more !votes for keep. --doncram (talk) 17:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
  • So you're 'voting' keep three times? Seriously though, I read the article talk page, which is why I removed the prod and brought it here. PhilKnight (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:38, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete change to Weak Keep. I was the one who originally PRODded this article, and (IIRC) I did do a fairly in-depth search for sources before tagging it. I couldn't find any sources online, and the one source that was mentioned in the article gets virtually no mentions on google apart from wikipedia mirrors. All the same, I'd be more than happy if someone were to prove me wrong by finding some references to establish WP:Notability. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 01:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep - I have already expressed my views not to delete the article on its talk page. Again strongly argue to keep it. The basis for proposed deletion of Natthan Singh article is not justified because the only cause for deletion proposed is - "A search for reliable sources found nothing that could establish notability. I could not find anything online about the reference cited in the references section." It is to be noted here that author is a Hindi language writer who has authored a number of books on literature as listed in the article itself. I do not think that a writer of English can only be a criteria for notability. Hindi language on internet is still in offing and in due time we will find searchable references. We find references on internet about books written by him. His book on Jat history in hindi is a commendable contribution and it is being translated in English. If we go on deleting articles like this it will be a bad trend and we will loose information about such authors and literary and historical work which has been done by them. At least three of his creations have been awarded in India. As such I strongly recommend to keep. burdak (talk) 03:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete Fails WP:BIO by a mile as written, search for sources unavailing. Keep votes so far amount to saying "give a free pass to all articles about Hindi-language writers because they don't have sources yet." I find myself disinclined to throw out Wikipedia's principles so that we can accomodate a few hundred million extra unverifiable stubs. RayTalk 13:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
No one asking for a hundred million stubs. The AFD is about one particular person. --doncram (talk) 23:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete I agree that verifiability is a fundamental principle of wikipedia.If it is not verifiable it must be deleted.: Shyamsunder (talk) 20:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
There's no wish by anyone to have unverifiable information here, but that is not what an AFD is about, it is about notability of this particular person/topic. If you question some specific assertion in the article, say so by tagging that, not trying to throw away it all. I have added some referencing, myself, and currently believe all the information is accurate. --doncram (talk) 23:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete on basis of argument above. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC).
You should know there's discussion at Talk:Natthan Singh tending towards acceptance of the awards as demonstrating notable distinction. I think you need to read the article and the Talk page. I don't mean to respond to every negative comment, sorry, but the person seems pretty well accomplished and notable to me, more so than 99% of BLP articles i've come across recently. --doncram (talk) 23:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
The person may well be pretty accomplished and notable but the sources do not yet seem to be there to demonstrate this clearly. Maybe adequate sources will develop in time. Info on library holdings would be useful. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC).
  • Comment I changed my !vote above based on the source found that verifies the awards he received, and these hits that point to those awards as being notable. WP:AUTHOR criteria 4(c) seems to call this notable. See the talk page for more details on the discussion between Doncram & I about it. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) talk 02:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete The ghit explosion mentioned in the talk page is partly due to en.wiki, the particular book despite no real gscholar or other such usage is quite popular as a reference here. This has come up on quite a few discussions at WP:FTN. As for the awards, note that the Sahitya Akademi has many notable awards, the grant of Rs 5000 is not one of them. Until such time as we can demonstrate that this person meets our notability guidelines and the content passes WP:V, the article shouldn't be up.—SpacemanSpiff 02:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep This article because it give important information about a person who wrote in Hindi language. It should'nt be deleted. Deletion of this article is loss many information about an author of Hindi literature and a novelist.

Premsukhdidel (talk) 09:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Keep- The proposed deletion of this article itself is not justified and purely biased. -- Last Emperor (talk) 04:37, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
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.

Strong Keep - I agree with User:Doncram. Deletion is too harsh and would seem to be an example of anti-Hindi or English-centric bias. Some of the editors have commented here very casually without even trying to know about the author and his contribution to Hindi literature. I strongly favour to Keep. 59.94.96.167 (talk) 09:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://enwiki.freddythechick.net/index.php?title=English_Wikipedia_@_Freddythechick:Articles_for_deletion/Natthan_Singh&oldid=12074240"