Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biswajit Mukhopadhyay

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 per criteria A7 and G11 Nick (talk) 13:38, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Biswajit Mukhopadhyay[edit]

Biswajit Mukhopadhyay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable author, self-promo. Fails WP:NAUTHOR Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 15:48, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:06, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:06, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Probably was worthy of a CSD. Just pure spam. Jupitus Smart 06:36, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Approval Suggested Should appearent famousness be the ultimate yardstick to evaluate notableness, then this article might have been prone to deletion. But otherwise, if we value truth and its readily-verifiableness, plus the purpose for which the truth is being presented, then this article should find a strong ground in Wikipedia.
The references available with this succinct article, including a Google-verified physical address, demonstrate nothing more than factual information, all of which can be verified in minutes. This evidently supports the claim noted by user 'AuthorBM'(vide 'View history' of the original article) about the purpose with which the page was created. And above all, could any biased blank promotion at all stand in Wikipedia?—— people would keep editing and improving it, thereby making it further informative and reliable in the coming days.
Therefore, requesting all respected admins to remove those deletion tags stamped above and honour the article-matter with its due scope.
49.203.62.215 (talk) 16:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article under question satisfies all the fundamental ethics on which Wikipedia is established. It owes mostly to the fifth pillar ('Wikipedia has no firm rules') that Wikipedia has become an information-ocean today. I quote from the page I just referred to, 'Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time'

Time has come. Why not we come ahead generously to broaden the scope of allowance? If we use policies as rigid tools to screen authentic verified contents, we are trying make Wikipedia stagnant. We should reconsider.

Contents presented must not contradict decency, etiquettes and policy-guidelines. But neither should we confine Wikipedia by coining policies as barriers. Policies might rather be modified to accommodate inclusion of factual statements, even if it is a self-declaration towards some authentic purpose. One can modify or add to the content for betterment, but deletion! Sorry, it is not something meaningful as per Wiki-principle. To sum up I repeat, prompt routine coining of policies as screening-tools would someday turn the ocean of authenticity into stagnant table. Administrators may kindly review and delete delete-tag(s). Thank you. 49.203.158.192 (talk) 05:46, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Justified Article

Hi all, please note in the article "Biswajit Mukhopadhyay" we did not find any big claim of accomplishments or unverifiable praise about the person concerned. If you still find any phrase objectionable go ahead and purify it by editing the same. Please don't blindly follow the tradition of using policies as scissors to cut off each and everything that seems unconventional. Bye.14.194.215.83 (talk) 06:23, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • A Memo:India today, like many other developing countries in Asia and Africa, demands generous initiatives to spread IT awareness in mass. This article would present a living inspiration. It has that potency to take notable role in digital revolution in India. Wikipedia authority should inspire this honest effort. That's all.27.107.130.124 (talk) 09:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
comment Please see WP:NOBLE. Same thing applies here. Just because its a good cause or the person works for a 'good cause' doesn't mean they or the cause are notable. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:21, 17 January 2017 (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/Biswajit_Mukhopadhyay&oldid=1078160164"