Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suresh Danoda

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. RL0919 (talk) 13:50, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suresh Danoda[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)

Politician who has not been elected and does not hold any constitutional office. The subject fails WP:NPOL , WP:GNG and being a general secretary, Scheduled Caste (Anusuchit Jati) Morcha of the Bharatiya Janata Party does not qualify him to have a stand alone article on Wikipedia. FitIndia ^Talk 11:04, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. FitIndia ^Talk 11:06, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. FitIndia ^Talk 11:06, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per the nom's point, subjects whom have not been elected to a notable office do not normally meet WP:NPOL.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:33, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- The person is also a working member in Government of Haryana. References/citations are described. Denotified & Nomadic Tribes Development Board (Vimukt Ghumantu Jati Vikas Board) is the department of Government. He is taking two major positions at the statewide office. --iamrahulsethi 17:06, 10 July 2019 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: iamrahulsethi (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. and appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed.[reply]
Delete: Non-notable and non-elected politician with no significant coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. GSS (talk|c|em) 17:27, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- The person has a very notable personality and has good media coverage (more references/citations added) and already mentioned in talk page about not having a close connection with the subject of the article.18:31, 10 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamrahulsethi (talk • contribs)

You may not have a personal connection but you disclosed that you work for the political party that he is a member of and stated that you could get access to his Government ID if necessary so I'd say you almost certainly have professional connection that is definitely close enough to be considered a COI. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:22, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As a NPOL and GNG fail. Also Iamrahulsethi, you can comment as much as you want but you can only vote once. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:40, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. People are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just for existing as civil servants in the government bureaucracy — but two of the four footnotes here are primary source content on the government's own self-published website about itself, which are not support for notability at all, and the two which are real media are just short blurbs about him announcing a government policy, not substantive coverage about him doing anything relevant to our notability criteria. The notability test for a Wikipedia article is being substantively the subject of a significant volume of press coverage, not just getting your name into the newspaper twice as a giver of soundbite in an article about something else. Bearcat (talk) 18:44, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- The poorly sourced content is removed. It's good to have only verified content rather than deleting the whole article. --iamrahulsethi 19:35, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, a person has to be properly demonstrated as passing our notability criteria before he's allowed to have a Wikipedia article at all. It's not just a question of "keeping verified content" — if the content isn't being verified by notability-supporting reliable source coverage about him (which is not the same thing as "coverage about other things which happens to mention his name") that would get him over WP:GNG, then it's still not keepable whether it's "verified" or not. Bearcat (talk) 20:09, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The author has been blocked for sockpuppetry. GSS (talk|c|em) 05:44, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence of passing WP:NPOL criteria. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:32, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
delete per bearcat, socking, and COI. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:53, 16 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.