Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay 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 delete. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:40, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jay Sidhu

[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)

This is a pure press release: referring to him by his first name, relying on sources like Businesswire, a publication whose only purpose it to publish press releases, sources from his own firm, and promotional interviews. As one would expect, it was started by an obvious coi editor , and apparently much revised by others.

He might or might not be notable, but the article would have to be started over. The guideline here is TNT. DGG ( talk ) 06:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:54, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:54, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I recognize that this article started out biased, but I think that I and other editors have cleaned it up a lot from the way the article arrived in 2008. I changed the first-name references to surnames. The stuff attributed to press releases is uncontroversial, and I think there are enough good references from reliable sources to establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:36, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhta oover half the contents of the articles is still spam. When such drastic fixing is needed, the correct course is TNT. DGG ( talk ) 18:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Even after improvement, this is still more puffery or a prose CV, not an article. Looking through the sources, there is very little that rises above the level of WP:MILL for a banking executive, if any. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:40, 21 September 2021 (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.