Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advit Sahdev

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 redirect to Odigma. Redirecting under the assumption that if that article stays, the redirect is useful (as said by Anupmehra and not disagreed with) and if not, the redirect will be deleted under G8. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:41, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Advit Sahdev

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

Notability. Lots of references, but all are reun of the mill coverasge princioally about companies rather than this individual. Some refs seem to be self-published. TheLongTone (talk) 11:33, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:35, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has b een included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:35, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete, on balance - there's actually two interviews in RSes that supply information about him and serve as evidence of notability - but the rest is almost entirely about his companies, mentioning him tangentially or not even at all. Two interviews isn't enough to swing a BLP off I'd think - David Gerard (talk) 13:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Odigma, the company he founded and is known for. Anup [Talk] 16:25, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Not entirely convinced by that article either ... - David Gerard (talk) 21:33, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just Googled it and nominated for deletion. There are as usual tons of PR and WP:ROUTINE coverage. Needs to be checked against CORPDEPTH. In any case, if that gets deleted, this one too, under G8 criteria. Anup [Talk] 22:42, 11 September 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.