Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tejaswi S. Naik

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. czar ⨹ 15:12, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tejaswi S. Naik[edit]

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

He’s a junior level apparatchik of the state of Madhya Pradesh in India and does not have enough references to warrant an article on him. Fails WP:GNG. Also most of the other references are only links to orders allocating his cadre or posting which every officer will have. Uncletomwood (talk) 13:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC) Uncletomwood (talk) 13:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:14, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:14, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not notable, possible hoax--Mevagiss (talk) 20:52, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Being he a junior level prentice does not questions notability of Indian Administrative servants, the membership of the elite service of the Indian union itself confers them a badge of extra ordinary notability. In India all the major and minor policies are executed with the unanimous consensus of them. Per me does not being a politician but providing a certificate of victory to them only is sufficient to keep us from asking their executiveness. Although i have not gone through to create articles space for all of them, this subject has earned a fame in between state and central bureaucracy and political galleries in a very short span of time, would not wonder if some one else creates it some day after this discussion ends at its deletion. Thanks. Regards.доктор прагматик 10:58, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:38, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your opinions doctor pragmatik but they don't change the fact that this article does not meet WP:NOTABILITY or WP:POLITICIAN standards.--Mevagiss (talk) 11:53, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete In general we don't have articles on career bureaucrats, even the most senior ones. He would have to be notable for another reason. – Margin1522 (talk) 21:25, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deadbeef 07:27, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Actually we do usually have articles on the most senior career bureaucrats. But not on those at his level. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:14, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:15, 3 December 2014 (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.