Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kottakkal Madhu

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 of the debate was keep. Kimchi.sg 15:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kottakkal Madhu[edit]

NN, unWP:V fancruft. Stanfordandson 07:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per CSD:A7, also fails WP:BIO and WP:V. AFD tag removed by editor. --Coredesat 08:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy and delete per vanity and failure to assert notability. Don't understand how this can be considered fancruft though Ydam 12:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Bio that does not assert notability. —Centrx→talk 21:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The artist himself may well be notable; however, the page could well be a copyvio. ImpuMozhi 01:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain but not a speedy. I doubt that he is a big enough name to deserve an article, but others may have valid points to make. Tintin (talk) 04:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have done a rewrite and copyedit. It is copyvio nomore. Added references. I think this bio can stay. - Ganeshk (talk) 14:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - barely asserts notability with the award. Please explain the significance of the award. Royalbroil 00:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, even though I am the nominator. I think Ganeshk's edits have brought this article to an encyclopedic level I didn't believe it could achieve. Stanfordandson 01:23, 22 June 2006 (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.