Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krishnahari Baral

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 keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Krishnahari Baral[edit]

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

1.No credible references. The main reference is the person's own website. It seems the page is created either by himself and/or his relatives. Totally created by the user:laysforme

2.References not enough to really suggest that this person is of any importance neither notable. 3. The only other reference is wikipedia itself- not accepted in wikipedia. 4. Meets G11 of WP:Speedy Deletion criteria. This article is nothing more than an advertising stunt and spam. 5. Meets the following reasons for deletion: -Content that meets at least one of the criteria for speedy deletion -Advertising or other spam without relevant content (but not an article about an advertising-related subject) -Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and articles that are themselves hoaxes -Articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed -Articles whose subjects fail to meet the relevant notability guideline (WP:N, WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:CORP and so forth) -Articles that breach Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons -Redundant or otherwise useless templates -Any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia SupernovaeIA (talk) 04:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On a side note: Here is a valid proof that this article is an advertising stunt: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Picture_of_Swapnil_Baral.png The user laysforme is the person's son who has contributed totallly to this article. He created his own page which was recently deleted too.SupernovaeIA (talk) 04:24, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The best sources I could find:

From the article ref section:

Atom, Netra, ed. Geetkar Krishna Hari Baral: Shirjana Ra Samalochana. Kathmandu: Tanneri Prakasan, 2002. Print.
Interview by Bijay Lama. Black and White. Image Television. Kathmandu, Summer 2013. Television.
Interview by Hemanta Bramha. Silpi Ra Saili. AV News Television. Kathmandu, 2011. Television.
Interview by Naresh Bhattarai. Love and Life. Tarai Television. Kathmandu, Winter 2010. Television.
Interview by Sushma KC. Kehi Mitho Baat Garau. Himalaya Televison. Kathmandu, Summer 2012. Television.
"Interview with Dr. Krishnahari Baral." Interview by Bibek Regmi. Aparichit Yatra. AV News Television. Kathmandu, Winter 2010. Television.

Dont think all these are able to suggest the person is notable?Cant find any of these interviews online either.SupernovaeIA (talk) 00:25, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Found on Google:

[1], endorsement for Barel's book by the President of Nepal.
[2], media interview.
[3], "Krishnahari Baral is one of the most successful contemporary lyricists of Nepal"
[4], summary of statements about Baral
[5] "lyrics by veterans like .. Krishna Hari Baral"
[6] "one of the most popular lyricists in the realm of Nepali song"
[7] "..renowned lyricist Dr. Krishna Hari Baral.."

Suspect there is more in foreign-language sources. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 19:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per WP:GNG, noted Nepali language lyricist. Sourcing for Nepal and India is very challenging (see WP:INDAFD). More so finding sources for an artist working in the Nepali language (no Latin characters), compounded by no option for Google Translate. Yet we have all these available English sources praising, including an endorsement from the President of Nepal. It's plenty considering the difficulties. It would probably do more harm than good to delete. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 20:36, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Professor of Nepali at what I think is the main Nepalese university? Certainly notable, by common sense. The refs above about the importance of his poetry are sufficient to show notability there also DGG ( talk ) 09:15, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure? Being a professor does not pass the WP:Notability guideline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.158.217 (talk) 10:43, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:17, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The acclaim he has received in reliable sources as a Nepali lyricist is enough to make him notable, and when you add that he is a professor of Nepali at Nepal's best university, a literary critic, a prize-winning poet and a textbook author, I conclude that the article should be kept. That being said, the current version has quite a bit of puffery, and should br rewritten from the neutral point of view. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:04, 16 September 2013 (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.