Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dinesh Vaghela

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Spartaz Humbug! 09:22, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dinesh Vaghela[edit]

Dinesh Vaghela (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Most reliable sources only mention him in passing. The sources in the article are put out by the political party. He was only a candidate and not elected. None of his party positions have inherent notability and he does not meet WP:NPOL. None of the other coverage meets WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Article should be deleted with the WP:Usual Caveats to recreate it if he wins a notable election or later becomes a notable figure. JbhTalk 18:06, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jbhunley: @NeilN: I have mentioned the sources below. He is the National Executive Member and also the Head of the Disciplinary Action Committee of the Aam Aadmi Party which is the fastest growing political party in India. Apart from that he has also published 2 books which have a world wide presence.

Please understand. I am a new user. Please give me a second chance.--Kabir Vaghela (talk) 19:20, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kabirvaghela (talk • contribs) 19:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilN: Kabirvaghela pinged you above but did not sign his comment. Pinging you for him. JbhTalk 19:24, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jbhunley: Could you please ask some of your editors to edit the page and clear all the issues?--Kabir Vaghela (talk) 20:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Kabirvaghela: There is absolutely nothing that can be done to address the notability issues with out sources that talk about the subject. I have looked and other editors have looked. We can not find enough. All these sources you have listed are passing mentions, minor quotes or material put out by the party. Read WP:NPOL and WP:GNG and make a statement of how he meets the criteria set out there. I can not really do anything to help with that because, after reading through the sources, searching the web and asking input from other editors, I believe he does not meet those criteria. Your job is to convince the other editors here, through policy based arguments and evidence that he does meet those criteria. Just posting links without saying how they contribute to notability and how he passes the notability criteria is not a sufficient keep argument. JbhTalk 20:57, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jbhunley: @NeilN:
Point no. 3 in WP:NPOL says Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article".
So according to this, the links that I have mentioned above do meet this criteria.
I have mentioned reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article.
I have removed the unnecessary links.
The following links are all reliable sources that are independent of the subject article:
--Kabir Vaghela (talk) 17:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jbhunley: @NeilN:
P.S. Search for Dinesh Vaghela on Google. The entire page has his name in all the links. Also, his wikipedia page is come on the first page. I just want to say that this is a very important page for wikipedia. the subject has significant coverage internationally.
I request you to keep the page and resolve all the issues as soon as possible. Rest is up to you all. Cheers! --Kabir Vaghela (talk) 17:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Kabirvaghela: Please format your comments using proper indentation for talk pages. Use one more : than the comment you are replying to. I have re-formatted your comments to make reading this page easier for other editors. JbhTalk 19:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jbhunley: Okay! Thank you so much.--Kabir Vaghela (talk) 19:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep delete Isn't innately notable because of any election wins or any of the office-positions he has held, so the question is of WP:GNG. I found a lot of trivial mentions in articles where Waghela is quoted on behalf of Aam Aadmi Party, Bharat Swabhiman Trust, Patanjali Yog etc, but only one article that devotes any space on him personally, and that too in context of a pre-election profile, which raises WP:BLP1E issues (there is another biographical article but that is in an online only local "newspaper" that appears to be a one-person enterprise and doesn't qualify as a reliable source). IMO the coverage is too meager and/or trivial to establish notability at the moment. Abecedare (talk) 15:03, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Change to weak keep, in light o the Deccan Herald article Neil points to, which along with the Indian Express piece has eneough biographical coverage to establish notability and for us to write a stub. The reason for "weak" is that I fear that the thinness of the material will result in gathering of fluff, or the article becoming a coatrack but, as per policy, those issues are best handled through editing rather than deletion. Abecedare (talk) 19:17, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I believe more sources have been added since this AFD began. I think this is enough to establish notabilty. --NeilN talk to me 17:31, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Being able to establish bare biographical facts is not the criteria for GNG, NPOL or ANYBIO. All require significant coverage or meeting particular criteria such as being elected to a notable office. Head of Party Discipline does not carry inherent notability. Perhaps, in the future, there will be some significant coverage about the subject, possibly in relation to the current "scandal" going on in his party. He gets his name in the paper a lot but mostly as short quotes and passing mention. Right not I still believe is is TOOSOON. JbhTalk 19:52, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep I think he passes WP:NPOLITICIAN, although I don't think he passes WP:GNG. However, I believe that passing WP:NPOLITICIAN is sufficient. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Misread at first and thought he was a national politician. Being a local politician means he fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOLITICIAN, so delete. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Being a local politician means they don't pass WP:NPOLITICIAN, and the lack of significant coverage means they fail WP:GNG. Therefore, they don't pass anything, and should be deleted. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:25, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I think this passes WP:BIO. There is a profile about him here here and hundreds of articles where he is mentioned in a meaningful way like here. His name is spelled Vaghela and Waghela, so I think he must have a mother tongue in another alphabet where there could be more sources. Elgatodegato (talk) 01:44, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I do not mean to be overly picky but the article where you say he is "mentioned in a meaningful way" simply mentions his name. The sum total of his mention in that reference is "... on Wednesday joined the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in the presence of its national executive member Dinesh Vaghela." That is all, nothing more. I go to the effort to point this out here because this is how he is often mentioned in the press, in passing and with no depth. Even hundreds of such mentions does not make one notable. If you can help locate non-English sources that would be great, such sources could very well contribute to his notability if they can be located. PS The other source you mention is already used in the article. JbhTalk 02:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I misunderstand it, but the way it was written, "in his presence" in the first paragraph, seems significant to me. You don't usually see that unless the presence is significant some way. It's very formal to me and almost royal. But maybe it has some significance I don't understand, like someone may officially join a party only if a representative is present. Unfortunately I don't know what his name is in his mother tongue. Maybe @Kabirvaghela: can help? Elgatodegato (talk) 02:52, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Elgatodegato: Dinesh Vaghela's official name is spelt Dinesh Vaghela but many people in Gujarat (which is his hometown) spell the surname with a 'W'. Hence, all this confusion. People who don't know spell it with a 'W' and people who know him spell it with a 'V' which is the correct spelling. --Kabir Vaghela (talk) 19:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The Times of India article appears to be one short quote within one very short article? Which leaves the Deccan Herald article as the only actual reliable source. The others are affiliated or of questionable reliability. valereee (talk) 13:57, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 19:06, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Guies, Can I re-do the page with proper references? or is it gonna get deleted? --Kabir Vaghela (talk) 19:43, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kabir Vaghela, if you have better references, you can present them here. Is there no native-language newspaper that has done a profile of the subject? --NeilN talk to me 19:49, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Kabirvaghela: you are welcome to edit the article while the AFD is open. Such edits can even help reviewers better judge the notability of the subject. Just be sure to comply with wikipedia's content policies (WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:BLP) in your edits, and if you are related to the subject in any way, read and follow wikipedia's policy on conflict of interest. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 19:52, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Kabirvaghela: Kabir, you could move the article to draft space -- that would let you work on it while you're looking for references. That way you wouldn't lose all your work in a deletion. Maybe over the next few months there will be more coverage in reliable sources. valereee (talk) 14:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Abecedare: Yes, I am related. I wasn't aware of the guidelines. What do I do now? I created the page. Is there a way I can delete all my edits for this page? --Kabir Vaghela (talk) 20:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Will reply on your talk page. Abecedare (talk) 20:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Kabir, the concern over the conflict of interest is that when we're writing an article about a relative, sometimes it's hard for us to objectively assess his actual notability. The person is important to us, and that sometimes makes us believe he is more notable than he actually is, and the question here is whether or not he is notable. One good way for you to prove that he is notable for Wikipedia is to find at least three stories ABOUT HIM in national or international newspapers or magazines. Not stories in which he is simply mentioned or quoted but stories that are at least partly ABOUT him. Not local newspapers or online-only new sites (unless they have hundreds of thousands of readers per day such as Huffington Post or Slate.) valereee (talk) 20:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Valereee: Here you go
Kahir, the first is a bare mention of the subject in an article about someone else. The second is a bare mention of hte subject in an article about an incident. The third is a bare mention of the subject in an article about someone else. I'm sorry, but this looks very much like a person who is slightly involved in an -incident- that may or may not be notable itself. This person is only being mentioned because he is a member of a disciplinary committee which is dealing with a politician's bad behavior. I just don't see this as proving notability. valereee (talk) 13:47, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

--Kabir Vaghela (talk) 18:08, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @KaranMehta240892:! Welcome to Wikipedia. It looks like you started editing yesterday, so you may be unfamiliar with the process by which article subjects are proven notable. You can find more information here: WP:NOTE valereee (talk) 13:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Spartaz Humbug! 16:16, 22 May 2015 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dinesh_Vaghela&oldid=1151669021"