Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santokh Ram

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. Courcelles (talk) 20:33, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Santokh Ram[edit]

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

If we at all find anything verifiable in reliable sources we can discuss about notability of this person. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No such indication of notability at present. Written in a too much promotional tone to handle. Mr RD 18:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Subject may be a professor at Jammu University,[1] but I doubt that qualifies for WP:NACADEMICS #5, and searches suggest that English-language sources required to meet WP:BASIC are not found. -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 12:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:43, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete by all means as this is another case of an article that has stayed the same and would need to be restarted and rewritten to be better if that is possible. Pinging only still active user Abductive. SwisterTwister talk 06:33, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The history of this article is full of different bad versions of the article, some not quite so incomprehensible as the current one but none with good sourcing. External searching doesn't turn up anything usable. In any case he doesn't seem to pass WP:PROF (according to some versions of the article, he seems to have been a university administrator but not its head). —David Eppstein (talk) 06:54, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, WP:Vanity. Abductive (reasoning) 18:08, 5 October 2015 (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.