Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanjana Ganesan (2nd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 speedy delete‎. G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page. (non-admin closure) ––FormalDude (talk) 15:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjana Ganesan[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Sanjana Ganesan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnotable fancruft, only 3 sources (Really more like 1.5 sources). QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 21:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Question: The article is junk, but (however unfortunately) this is not a reason for deletion. Which reason for deletion are you invoking here, QuickQuokka? -- Hoary (talk) 22:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hoary: I think it was pretty clear I was invoking #8 (not notable)
    Literally the first word of my comment is unnotable. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 22:17, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But QuickQuokka, #8 is not "Articles that fail to make it clear that their subjects meet the relevant notability guideline (RNG)" or similar; it's "Articles whose subjects fail to meet the [RNG]". An article can be crap but nevertheless be about a subject that could have been shown to meet the RNG if only the author(s) had had the needed competence and energy. Thus it's normal for the AFD nominator to state that their own energetic googling/duckduckgoing/etc has failed to demonstrate notability. -- Hoary (talk) 22:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or draftify. Little evidence of notability. Maproom (talk) 22:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Maharashtra. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 22:54, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or should be moved to Draft. Almost nothing is sourced within the article. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 23:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This wretchedly bad article, or perhaps its subject, has so far been condemned for lack of notability by QuickQuokka, Maproom, and Layah50; but none of these three editors, and nobody else, has yet claimed to have tried but failed to find sources. If any decent sources do exist, I can't assume that they call her "Sanjana Ganesan" (in Roman letters). I don't know what other scripts would be relevant here, I don't know how her name would be written in any of those scripts, and even if I found anything I'd have to depend on Google Translate and would have to guesstimate the reliability of the source. So I hope that energetic and linguistically competent (and of course level-headed) editors contribute to this AFD. I'm very willing to be persuaded that this should be deleted, and if it's deleted then it should be salted too. -- Hoary (talk) 23:26, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that too, looked like author first moved it to Draft while this AfD was still going on. It seems it got requested to move back here on technical move request, but I'm wasn't sure if the speedy request was from when was moved to draft, or if was after it got moved back. WikiVirusC(talk) 17:16, 19 July 2023 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sanjana_Ganesan_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1166589203"