Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sailen Debnath

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. postdlf (talk) 16:04, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sailen Debnath

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

Does not appear to meet notability criteria for academics. It doesn't help that the article is mainly pov OR. I note that this author is now prominent in a number of articles using similar pov language. Dougweller (talk) 02:29, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:51, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:51, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:52, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 16:56, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Alipurduar College where he is an associate professor appears to be a small college with a 3 person history department.[1]. Being head of this department is not a big deal. Dougweller (talk) 15:16, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T C N7JM 09:11, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - so the lack of interest here seems to be a matter of the article in question being too long; didn't read, so let me break it down for you:

The subject would seem to fail WP:PROF with nothing much in terms of an academic record that would set him apart from most middle-tier university staff.
Though there are a long list of "references" attached to the article, some are broken links and many others make no mention (or passing mention at best) of the subject. Despite the very long list, I'm actually inclined to think the subject fails WP:GNG.
A good number of the unlinked references fail WP:V in that while sources are not required to be online, some of the references in question simply point to "conferences" or unspecified articles with no title. References do need to be accessible to other editors and many of those in the article are not.
Many of the references are simply links to places where you can buy the subject's books or google.books links for the books themselves. They are not coverage of the books, nor reviews of the books or their author. The few that are reviews are blogs.

In summary - I can't see how this subject could possibly meet our inclusion criteria at this stage and what is available with regard to references would probably only support a brief bibliography of non-notable books anyway. Stalwart111 10:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete on above findings. 09:38, 18 August 2013 (UTC).

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.