Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhalchandra Dattatray Mondhe

Bhalchandra Dattatray Mondhe[edit]

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 speedily as promotional and a probable violation of Wikipedia terms of service (created by an undeclared paid editor and prolific sockpuppeteer). If the topic is notable then WP:TNT applies. Guy (Help!) 07:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No indication of significance. Barely qualifies as a stub. Not worthy of their own article just because they received an award. Also page created by a user with seriously questionable motives. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:52, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: we're here to discuss the notability of the subject, not the current state of the article or the motives of its creator. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 03:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a recipient of the Padma Shri, India's 4th highest civilian award, which is only given to roughly 100 people per year out of a population of 1 billion, the subject passes WP:ANYBIO hands down. There was much press coverage after Mondhe received the award in 2016: [1], [2], etc. and this 2014 article details Mondhe's fight for Sirpur Lake. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 03:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Biwom (talk) 03:09, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is not enough content to deserve an article & the sources given do not go into the amount of depth/detail required to deserve an article. The names of Padma Shri recipients are listed on the Padma Shri article, a simple redirect from this article to the Padma Shri article would be the best option for something so trivial, with such little content. While the subject did receive the award, he hasn't done anything notable enough to deserve an article. Winning the fourth most important award in India, that has been awarded over 2500 times, isn't that much of a big deal. There are recipients of the Padma Shri who deservedly have articles, because they are highly notable in their own field - that isn't the case in this article. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 06:11, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Regards, KC Velaga ✉ 12:34, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Regards, KC Velaga ✉ 12:35, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:20, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - As per Spacecowboy's reasoning above. As an equivalent, UK CBE holders don't an article simply because they scored a gong. Awards are handed out like lollies these days by all governments as a means of courting the popular vote. Engleham (talk) 22:24, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Are you sure about CBE holders? You seem to be contradicting what I read here. Also, once again, the population of India is 20 times that of the UK. Only roughly 100 Padma Shri are awarded every year. That might be about the same number as CBE. So from my perspective, the value of a Padma Shri is much higher than that of a CBE, and your comparison doesn't hold at all. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 05:32, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Biwom, if you wish to base your argument on this, then please note that a CBE is the third highest award in the UK and the OBE is the fourth highest award - (1. GBE 2. KBE/DBE 3. CBE 4. OBE) and that it was stated that "the MBE (or OBE) does not confer inherent notability. Consensus is, however, that the CBE (and above) does" The Padma Shri is the fourth highest award in India, so at a comparable level to an OBE, which in the link that you were so kind to provide, does not confer inherent notability

Also, to state that something has a higher worth because the population is larger is not very accurate. A phd holder in India is not worth more than one from a country with a smaller population, so why would an award be worth more?

I'd suggest that based on this, consensus regarding the notability of different levels of awards is crystal clear and can be applied to this particular article. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 06:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Yes, I was thinking I was going to be misunderstood here, so to clarify: I am not saying the Padma Shri has more value than the CBE because India is a bigger country than the UK, but because it is proportionally given to less people. Now that this is clarified, I disagree wholly with your argument that say, "you can only compare the 4th with the 4th". From my perspective, the comparison can only be made based (roughly) on the number of awardees per year to total population. Otherwise, we would have a bias in favor of countries where awards are "handed out like lollipops", which is once again clearly not the case of the 4 "Padma" awards in India.

Now, to be even more clear: if it is true that the roughly 100 (??? to be confirmed) CBE awardees are considered automatically notable (??? to be confirmed), and if we consider that the roughly 100 Padma Shri awardees are not, I would like us, as a community, to explain exactly why it is so, so that it doesn't look like we have a wp:systemic bias here. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 08:47, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So basically, you wanna link to this because it refers to the notability of a CBE, but then disregard what it says when it says that an award that is clearly comparable with the padma shri, does not equal notability.

Number of awardees has nothing to do with it. There are numerous unimportant awards that are given in far smaller numbers than the Padma Shri, do they all equal notability? Damn...I was employee of the month for three months running! That must mean that I get my own Wikipedia article! Awesome! Now, where is Spacecowboy420 and how do I propose it for GA status? Spacecowboy420 (talk) 08:58, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The quality of the article and being a stub has nothing to do with notability, but the fact of him receiving Padma Shri awards makes it passing WP:GNG. I've also added some information and references to article to show notability out of Padma Shri context. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 08:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:43, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While the Padma Shree award by itself does not automatically confer notability, it certainly contributes to it, and when it is coupled with subject's other achievements, I think the article definitely meets GNG. If the article isn't particularly good yet, that has no bearing on notability and we should improve it, not delete it. We don't just delete stubs because they're stubs. Tigercompanion25 (talk) 04:09, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Padma Shri is a 4th order awards as does not imply notability or, in my opinion, substantially contribute to it. (As for the CBE, I think consensus is that it does imply notability -- it is the 3rd highest; but consensus on that is subject to change. Outside the award, there's nothing that meets notability here. }Author of one book--is not normally notable unless the book becomes extremely notable, or famous. Photographer, but no evidence of any works in major museums or, indeed , any museums. DGG ( talk ) 18:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC) .[reply]
Comment The article has been deleted as unambiguous advertising. I've requested the said admin to undelete the article to allow the discussions to go on. Lourdes 02:18, 2 September 2016 (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.