Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Hari Singh Sidhu

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 deleted. Geschichte (talk) 10:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Hari Singh Sidhu[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Lacks significant coverage. Mvqr (talk) 16:18, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unsourced BLP (PRODBLP), no indication of notability (CSD-A7). Kleuske (talk) 16:21, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did not A7 it because the article claims he is "well known".--Mvqr (talk) 16:25, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:43, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:43, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:43, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Zero notability. -- rsjaffe 🗩 🖉 16:52, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It should be a speedy delete. No evidence of notability. DMySon (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - despite being 'well known' I was unable to find a single source about him Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:40, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all I could find about this guy was a namedrop in a book about other things. Which obviously isn't enough for him to be notable. --Adamant1 (talk) 02:40, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not even close to being a notable surgeon.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:32, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this should be WP:SNOWed into essentially a speedy delete. There is zero sourcing that lends to the well-known claim. Best, GPL93 (talk) 21:44, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I decided to tag the article for WP:A7 because while the prose says "well-known" there's no referencing, even poor sourcing, to prop up that claim. Best, GPL93 (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2022 (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.