Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Satyanarayanan Chakravarthy

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 Draftify. Clear consensus to delete, but I don't see any reason to deny Dheerajmpai23's request for to draftify, as long as they understand they'll need to meet WP:BIO and/or WP:ACADEMIC before it can get moved back to mainspace. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:43, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now at Draft:Satyanarayanan Chakravarthy

Satyanarayanan Chakravarthy[edit]

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

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

Notability is questionable, leaning toward Unremarkable BigDwiki (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. BigDwiki (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. BigDwiki (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a non-notable person failing WP:GNG, specifically WP:BIO and WP:ACADEMIC, with no reliable independent in-depth sources. Article was moved to mainspace without full AfC procedure. Almost all sources with content in the article are short profiles, not independent or not about the subject. The closest ones are the two BuisnessLine articles, but neither is about the subject. The awards received appear to be minor and so not enough for ACADEMIC. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 08:44, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I looked through sources added after the start of the AfD, and none of them are about the subject, but rather various related topics. In three of them the person themselves is giving commentary, making the source primary for those parts. In fourth, it's less than a paragraph of a passing mention. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 21:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- And the 5 more sources added since are all similarly where the subject has themselves said something about a related project, but there is no focus or in-depth information about the subject themselves. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 08:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article relies heavily on primary sources, and verges on the promotional. Awards of any sort are a dime a dozen in academica; they need to be significant awards to count towards notability. I don't see evidence that this individual meets either WP:GNG or WP:PROF. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:30, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, mostly per nom and the comments of Hellknowz and Vanamonde93 above. I am somewhat less inclined to dismiss academic awards outright but several of the awards listed are for young researchers, and don't contribute to WP:PROF notability, while others don's look particularly significant. Citability here is pretty low, especially for the high citation engineering field. The top cited publications in Google Scholar have 69, 61 and 52 citations correspondigly. For someone who is genuinely academically notable in this field, with the research careeer that is almost 25 years long, I would have expected to see a lot more. Nsk92 (talk) 18:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Per above the article does not show signs of notability. Fails WP:GNG and not enough secondary sources.Alex-h (talk) 11:57, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep as he is a notable person The Search results online did not give relevant results as he is mentioned as SR Chakravarthy in several cases. The Search link in the deletion searches for the exact term "Satyanarayanan Chakravarthy". I have updated with relevant sources (other than primary sources)and have added them in the talk page too. Google Search Results , Publications (1), (2, Research Gate) Dheerajmpai23 (talk) 21:28, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Draftify/Userfy I would like to take some more time to improve the article. I request the admin to be moved to draftspace/UserSandbox as mentioned here to prevent loss of the original contributers. Dheerajmpai23 (talk) 11:56, 19 August 2019 (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.