Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajesh Bhola

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, along with indefinite blocks for Lanebard, Cantsco, and plosoren.—Kww(talk) 15:45, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rajesh Bhola[edit]

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

Anonymous IP removed a PROD with a photo posted by the subject himself and with a PR sounding post. No sources provided other than links to a search function in a couple of local newspapers which do not point to articles on the subject. IP also spammed several other articles with info on this subject. Alexf^(talk) 21:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom -- Alexf^(talk) 23:05, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non notable person Uncletomwood (talk) 05:35, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. — Joaquin008 ^(talk) 09:43, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I created the article with content moved from Cerebral palsy , in the hope that the contributor may find reliable sources suitable for demonstrating notability. If notability hasn't been demonstrated in the next five days, per our guideline Wikipedia:Notability, then I will support deletion. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 19:20, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – This is pretty well sourced, and the subject does seem reasonably notable.plosoren (talk) 16:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

— plosoren (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Delete Subject does not appear to meet notability standards, despite somebody's multiple attempts to spam his name across several articles. --auburnpilot talk 21:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep –The article is well sourced, supplemented with authentic newspaper reports, United Kingdom Accreditation Service certification of Spastic Society of Gurgaon. Additional information added on related pages of 'spastic', 'cerebral palsy' etc are not to be termed as 'spam' as those are bonafide and genuine additions to the information base of Wikipedia. However, the same additions which were termed as 'spam' have already been deleted. Reputed Indian national newspaper and periodical viz. Tribune and Friday Gurgaon links are attached, the link of official website of Spastic Society of Gurgaon is also given which are relevant references adequate enough for retention of the article.Cantsco (talk) 06:47, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

— Cantsco (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Keep Subject meets the notability guidelines as there are pertinent references. I will support keeping the article. Lanebard (talk) 08:47, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

— Lanebard (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

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.