Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Partho Sen-Gupta

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. -- Cirt (talk) 19:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Partho Sen-Gupta

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

Blatant autobiography by Psg116 (talk · contribs). Does not meet WP:ARTIST in my mind. bender235 (talk) 00:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 22:55, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:33, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 17 February 2011 (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) 02:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per meeting WP:GNG [1] and pushing[2] at WP:ANYBIO. Article needs cleanup aqnd beter sourcing, yes... but since it appears the author User:Psg116 stoped editing it back in 2006,[3] and it has subsequently received numerous edits from those with no apparent COI,[4] I think we can keep it and fix it. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 09:49, 24 February 2011 (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) 01:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article has been edited extensively by a variety of editors for five years, so is no longer an autobiography. The Indian Express article is a solid reference and good evidence of notability. Cullen328 (talk) 16:31, 2 March 2011 (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.