Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dewang Mehta

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. Article has been improved since nomination and as the nom's not commented I assume they're fine with it, Anyway consensus is to keep (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 01:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dewang Mehta

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

Subject may not meets the Wikipedia's notability and verifiability criteria -- in fact the article is pointing towards inherited notability. — Sanskari ^Hangout 11:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. — Sanskari ^Hangout 11:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — Sanskari ^Hangout 11:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — Sanskari ^Hangout 11:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The article text is a broth of peacockery and incoherence (for example "The wanted to that the profits of the YOU arrived until the common people...") to an extent to suggest WP:TNT. The edit history indicates it was originally created as a translation of a Spanish article, but that is itself tagged as "una traducción defectuosa". However there was a significant quantity of coverage around the subject's death, which may be enough to establish notability. I am inclined to edit-down a core referenced version of the article which may aid this discussion more than the current prose does. AllyD (talk) 12:56, 24 November 2016 (UTC) Now done: I have placed a cut-down version which also includes more references. AllyD (talk) 13:33, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: While much of the referencing material is obtained from press coverage and tributes at the time of the subject's sudden death, I think there is just about enough to sustain an argument that the subject had biographical notability distinct from the organisation which he directed. AllyD (talk) 13:36, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Redirect as, not only simply best known for this company, there's nothing here confirming any such CEO would be inherited notability, and the past deletion for advertising emphasizes these concerns, thus deletion is best before anything else to ensure it's completely removed. SwisterTwister talk 00:42, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. AllyD has re-written the article with references that suggest notability. utcursch | talk 02:35, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources, thus meets WP:GNG. Thanks to AllyD for fixing the article. One will not find tons of sources on internet because most of Indian newspapers do not keep archives for their pre 2000-01 publications. Still, coverage of his legacy in numerous newspapers gives a fair insight into his personality. Anup [Talk] 03:44, 25 November 2016 (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.