Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jayaram Padikkal (2nd nomination)

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. per WP:HEY. Reaching the highest rank for a police officer in the country has been agreed to show notability. (non-admin closure) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:12, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jayaram Padikkal[edit]

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

Article is without any good sources - links are

other wikipedia article
filled with information about his father but not about him
e-notes
dead
blog Bulwersator (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While I can find several passing references to his crimes,[1][2][3] he doesn't satisfy WP:CRIMINAL. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:46, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this article about a Director General of Police (Highest ranking Police Chief) in Kerala, India because of

reasons mentioned in AFD 1.
has an authorised biography Veṅṅānūr Bālakr̥ṣṇan (1997). Jayar̲āṃ Paṭikkalint̲e kr̲aiṃ ḍayari. Dhanuṣmān Grūp ōph Pabḷikkēṣans. which finds mention in the News article "From crime to spirituality". The Hindu. Feb 7, 2008.
The subject has enough coverage in National newpapers[4] and books[5] to establish GNG
I have cleaned the article, added references and removed the original research allegations, sources for which are highly unlikely and I have added few third party sources into the article-- ÐℬigXЯaɣ 07:03, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:46, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am in two minds on this one. The Google searches show some but not many reliable sources - probably borderline by themselves for notability but (since the subject's career was almost entirely pre-internet) there are probably more offline. However, the real problem with the page is shown by its history, alternating between being a stub and being a largely unreferenced attack page. And the stubbing has, probably unintentionally, sometimes deleted more than just the attacks - for instance, the fact that the subject finished his career as head of an Indian police force (presumably the one in Kerala), which seems to have swung the previous AfD, has now disappeared from the article. Basically, a proper referenced article on the subject probably could be written but it would be a lot of effort - and the emotions the subject rouses are still clearly great enough that the article would still risk the addition of poorly sourced attacks. PWilkinson (talk) 19:15, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ (changing to "keep", see below), regretfully, because I suspect the notability is there. I agree with PWilkinson's comments. The current article is an attack page, full of unsourced assertions of cruelty and corruption. The references provided at the page are unhelpful, and basic biographical information is lacking. Google New Archive does provide some Reliable Sources but they are not significantly about the subject. To create a proper article (needing a complete rewrite), or even a neutral sourced stub, would require access to the books which are mentioned in the article and/or found at Google Books. If someone does do a neutral rewrite, with at least some citations to Reliable Sources, I will reconsider my !vote. --MelanieN (talk) 17:55, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

to some extent I agree that better sources and the book mentioned above are needed, to improve. I have now removed all the unsourced claims along with the attack page tag. All the info in the article in its current form are properly sourced. The subject qualifies notability guidelines so the stub article can be kept. I think all the concerns said raised by the nominator have been addressed. Any comments now ? --Ðℬig XЯaɣ 18:17, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article is greatly improved now thanks to the revision by DBigXray. While they were doing that, I was creating a possible stub, which I posted at the article's talk page. However I think the article as it now stands is sufficiently sourced and neutral to retain. DBigXray is welcome to incorporate anything from my stub into the article if they wish. --MelanieN (talk) 18:35, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MelanieN I have now moved your version which actually is an even more stripped version of the article. The article now is fully sourced with no original research or attack of any kind. any more comments for improvement would be welcome--Ðℬig XЯaɣ 18:55, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good, DBigXray, I think between us we have solved this problem. One thing that would help the article (if you have verifiable information, which doesn't necessarily have to be searchable online - it can be a book for example): any biographical information, such as when and where he was born, when and where he died, any education he had, etc. --MelanieN (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the local language of the subject's place is Malayalam (which I do not understand), and the kind of source we would be looking for will be found in Malyalam ( wp:BIAS in online coverage in the region is another concern). Nevertheless, as the subject was popular, we were able to find some coverage in the more popular national media (the hindu, India Today), but thats all i could get.--Ðℬig XЯaɣ 20:08, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I posted a request at Wikiproject India to see if someone who knows Malayalam might be able to find this information for us. --MelanieN (talk) 20:45, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The current stub contains enough reliable sources to establish notability and appears to be both accurate and neutral. I noticed in the sources that Padikkal is deceased but no date or circumstances of death are included in the article. He was/is controversial. From the sources already listed, he was involved in and influenced historic episodes in the history of India. I judge that editors will eventually find consensus on how to deal with the controversies in a neutral manner and more sources to improve the article so it becomes truly encyclopedic. Until then, it needs close watching to revert attempts to add inappropriate and unsourced text. DocTree (talk) 21:40, 2 June 2012 (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.