Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kajol Aikat

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. Consensus of non-sock puppets is that the author is not yet notable. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:43, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kajol Aikat[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)

Non-notable author yet. 2 reliable sources found but coverage is not significant. Present references are bogus - Twitter, Goodreads, Amazon, Facebook etc. Dial911 (talk) 03:33, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dial911 (talk) 03:33, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Dial911 (talk) 03:33, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Dial911 (talk) 03:33, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not a non-notable author. The author is found to be a bestselling author. Unwanted content and soures are now edited accordingly. The present references are from relaible sources including national media like Telegraph and Hindustan Times. Revalidate the article again and remove your nomination for deletion. Remove the article from AfD and close the template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.30.156.42 (talk • contribs) — Example (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 07:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:59, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not found to be a non-notable author unlike mentioned by Dial911. The author is a bestselling author. Unwanted content and sources are found to be edited accordingly. The present references are from relaible sources including national media like Telegraph and Hindustan Times. Revalidate the article again and remove your nomination for deletion. Remove the article from AfD and close the template. This article should stay in Wikipedia.— Example (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 07:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:22, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:SIGCOV. Nothing at all in a gNews search [1]. The sole hit in a Proquest newspapers search is about a schoolgirl who "said she got inspired from well known writer Kajol Aikat who was a student of her school." As Nom wrote, we need sources.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:05, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Check this out: https://m.telegraphindia.com/states/jharkhand/fighting-bullies-with-book/cid/1431280 E.M.GregoryPlease do your research throughly because it lacks efforts. Google news hits are not reliable enough to provide credible sources solely.— 47.30.227.5 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

A color story in the local edition of a paper. E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:06, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are enough sources all over the internet and in the article (mentioned in references) that establish enough credibility to keep this article on Wikipedia. Remove the AfD nomination and keep this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.30.227.5 (talk) 22:58, 9 July 2019 (UTC) — Example (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 07:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

delete Sources don't meet WP:RS. Author isn't quite notable enough for a page. Ayepaolo (talk) 17:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep invalid argument with no proper citation. Kajol Aikat has also been nominated for Padma Shri 2020, the fourth highest civilian honor in India. Check this: https://padmaawards.gov.in/CARD.ASPX?NOMINEEUID=E1142263ABF099489A2BF24C15B5656EB66E54C918EF367CD94F4DEACEBF274A&RAND=288121 Other references in the article carry enough credibility to have a page for the author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.30.186.220 (talk) 01:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC) username (talk)[reply]

Keep Agreed that Kajol Aikat is nominated for Padma Shri this year, ref: https://padmaawards.gov.in/CARD.ASPX?NOMINEEUID=E1142263ABF099489A2BF24C15B5656EB66E54C918EF367CD94F4DEACEBF274A&RAND=288121 Other references are also strong enough to provide credibility required. The page can be listed as of a lower importance on Wiki Biographies but is important enough to be here. Keep this page and withdraw the Afd.— Wikilog009 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Note that every keep opinion - all 5 - are by an SPA.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:39, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked carefully at sources on page and searched diligently, and it is simply WP:TOOSOON for this young writer.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The author is though young but not WP:TOOSOON The article was accepted on the main space years back and unnecessary editing happened in the course which is now corrected. Keep this article and mark it as a low priority biography. The author is nominated for Padma Shri so that is solely enough to establish his credibility at present. If not, then there are references from notable national media houses like Hindustan Times and Telegraph which demonstrate the relevance and credibility of this biography and establishes eligibility to be an encyclopaedic acceptance. Also, irrespective of the nature of the account, the comments are valid. The lack of credibility that is repeatedly raised as an issue is not cited most of the time. This article should stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikilog007 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you? Are you Kajol Aikat himself? You see, being desperate isn't gonna help. We all want to include as many articles on Wikipedia for its expansion. But that doesn't mean anything and everything will be included. Have some patience, if the subject is really notable, they will get their article on Wikipedia sooner or later. And self nomination for Padma Shri won't even count as something notable. Come back when the subject earns it. Till then, I request you not to vandalize this page and waste your time here. If you need any guidance on how to improve Wikipedia feel free to ping me. Dial911 (talk) 06:51, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Neither I am Kajol Aikat nor I represent him in any way. I have been a Wiki editor since last 3+ years and I expect you to state your queries in a rather formal or appropriate tone from the next time. And it has nothing desperate to be honest. And, I am free to put my opinions in favour of an article that I find to be a wrong nomination as on this date. Because I don’t find it violating any biographic norms in the latest edit.

Note: The author has a decent public catering in India and if you are from any other end in the world maybe you should check with this fact first. Just because several comments go against your nomination doesn’t mean it vandalises Wikipedia. The article was accepted on the main space, so let’s keep this as a low priority bio, if required. Also, removing this can impact information that any user can use to learn about the author who has written one 01 TASS Bestseller in 2015. The citation is provided on the article itself. So, it’s not like anything and everything is included by keeping this article. Like you said, we all want relevant content to be there on Wiki.
Also: I have noticed that there has been major editing in this article. The excessive/ non-cited content that was there now seems streamlined, and every line is now referenced to one or many big Indian media house. So, I don’t find why notability and credibility of this author is questioned.
You primarily had issues with Facebook/ Youtube links to be there. I see that they are removed and only a valid amount of content is present in the current edit. You see, a personal/ biased sentiment against a low priority bio doesn’t make it entitled to be kept as an AfD.
I also checked the page stats and found it decent enough to be recorded as a Wiki inclusion.
And, by what authority or evidence do you mention that the Padma Shri nomination is self nominated? Do you have any citations for that? The nomination of Padma Shri can be made via various other public bodies. I recommend you to do your research first before putting on irrelevant/ non-cited statements.
Please remove this AfD as soon as possible as any violation to this page can majorly impact the information flow on Wikipedia which will only hamper it further. My vote is still to Keep it. Wikilog007

Speedy Keep I don’t see any prevailing issues with this article. The points raised by the nominator for AfD regarding bogus links this article seems corrected now. The rest of it looks fine.

Keep I don’t see any WP:SIGCOV failure here. This article looks okay to me. Not suitable for an AfD nom anymore. Let this article stay.

Delete Setting aside the fact that this seems to be attracting more transparent meatpuppets than a see-through Punch and Judy show - the sourcing presented as evidence for notability is quite insufficient. It does not help that half the sources are dead links - they might as well be made up at this point. From what can be verified, the much-touted award nomination is worth exactly zip, as I could nominate myself and my grandmother right now on that site if I wanted. Sales numbers on Amazon and self-promotion on forums are not a replacement for independent coverage and reviews, which are sorely lacking. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:24, 12 July 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.