Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chief Ministership of N. T. Rama Rao

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 Procedural close. I don't feel this is a good faith nomination for deletion due to the edit warring that led to the nomination. Further, the rationale for deletion (not the top-most comment which was not added in the correct thread order) does not provide a valid rationale for deletion. Problems with this article can be solved by discussion on the article's talk page and perhaps a merge discussion. Not suitable for AFD. v/r - T P 16:43, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chief Ministership of N. T. Rama Rao[edit]

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

Mr. Joyson Prabhu is wrong in his assertion that chief minister ship articles do not exist for Indian politicians (easy to verify with a search for chief ministership), Rajagopalachari and Kamaraj have pages like that, infact an editor suggested it for this page when " well referenced the actual things he did in office without editorializing" were added to his biography . Mr Nyttend's suggestion "things he actually did" was the core of this article till this edit war started, It was a list of 30 odd specific policies with references, and that was a valuable resource for any one interested in political history of Andhra Pradesh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.213.77 (talk) 20:07, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I created this article initially to spew out a mostly unsourced list as I got tired on an editor persisting to add it in the main article. Now an editor is using the sub article as an excuse to remove any mention of his political career in his main biography. A good article on him would effectively summarise this. The article will be a POV magnet and is causing major problems with the main article on him. There is no reason why we need a sub article when the main article is 27 bytes only. The scruffy list in my opinion should be deleted or at least if some points are important put into prose in the main article. Most of the content replicates that covered in the main article.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:41, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Blofeld is lying, I was tracking this as well and a look at the history of this article will clearly show the following. Mr. Blofeld was vandalizing the main page on N.T. Rama Rao, after being allowed back into Wikipedia from being banned for vandalizing and POVing in a lot of articles on which he had no expertise, A Wikipedia nominated editor looked into the issues and suggested moving the political career to a different article (the editor suggested Chief Ministership of N T Rama Rao to be like other political articles), and here it is. The new article was a very well referenced un-editorialized list of 32 domestic accomplishments of N.T.Rama rao, the references were a good resource, The article has been rated good by eight independent experts on the matter and was having about a 1000 views a month. The article was stable and a valuable asset to Wikipedia, Mr. Blofeld started vandalizing both N.T. Rama Rao main article and this one again. In the entire set of edits on either of the article, he has not added any information, not improved any quality and causes a lot of disruption to most of the articles he touches. I don't know why he is renaming the article, he agreed on the original title. Seems to be this guy is bent of making material unavailable and us-usable on Wiki.. He makes up stuff, he removed a photo claiming it is copyright material (I know it to be public domain fair use material) and then goes on to use it in another article. Time to deal with this man's disruptions again. Leave this article in place, the references and his 32 domestic priorities are a valuable resource for any who is interested in the political history of Andhra Pradesh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.247.102 (talk) 14:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@IP 24.7.247.102 The irony in your statement is that it was actually myself who cleaned up the POV N. T. Rama Rao article of a year or two ago and rewrote and sourced it and I am the chief reason the article has been pretty stable since then. As for the image you mention File:NT Rama Rao.jpg, it is clearly NOT public domain and may NOT be used in sister articles. I strongly suggest you look into things before accusing me of disruption and vandalism. Indeed you are so far wrong (including that I've ever been banned fpr vandlaising and POVing) that I'm not even going to try to defend the situation.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Questions After the current edit war grinds to a halt, couldn't this title be used for an article about what his government did while he was Chief Minister? I don't know whether this is common for Indian articles, but at least in the USA we have articles such as Presidency of Ronald Reagan. Also — what's the 27-byte article? Something that short should be speedily redirected to N. T. Rama Rao, his biographical article. Nyttend (talk) 13:50, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Someone just moved the article to Political career of N. T. Rama Rao. Nyttend (talk) 13:52, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It could yes, but the fact is even as Moviehub said this article contains POV and original research and is a magent for POV pushers. Rama Rao was a prominent Andhra Pradesh politician but he isn't Reagan and there's nothing here which couldn't adequately be summarised in his main article which is only 27 kb.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:18, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: NTR was a very famous political personality and a popular CM. However, i don't see the point of having a separate article on the fellow's chief-ministership. Apart from the fact that there are no precedents on other Indian politics related articles, there isn't a dearth of info that we couldn't suitably incorporate into his bio. Joyson Prabhu ^{Holla at me!} 10:46, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:50, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let me build a consensus based on policy: 1. This has been an article that was rated very highly by eight independent reviewers of the content prior to the latest edit war. 2. The article was created out of a consensus to create it based on a wiki admin's suggestion to avoid making the N T Rama Rao article too long. 3. The article had been a valuable addition and it had approx 1200 view per month. 4. Prior to the latest edit war that culminated with one of the warriors referring this article for deletion, it has been enhancing Wikipedia without any controversy. A well used well rated article's deletion would not be a good idea. Let us keep POV (Prominent politician's are difficult people to agree about, but what they did is usually public record) out and So I say leave it be.. now that the edit wars seem to have ended in a consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.247.102 (talk) 14:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:00, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has 35 references, presumably at least a few in the are suitable for wp:notability. Scale of the position indicates notability is highly likely. Article needs work. Lots of OR and POV problem. Provides a long list of happenings as "As Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh" but generally the sources just say that those things happened, most with not mention of him or his role. North8000 (talk) 22:23, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I concur with North 8000 need to get rid of the OR and POV but the reference list is authoritative and valuable.

Info Junkie

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.