Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akash Nanda

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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:47, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akash Nanda

[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)

No indication that the person is notable. Count Count (talk) 09:26, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Odisha. Shellwood (talk) 09:53, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as noted, notability claim seems to be "is a lawyer". Sources are weak, and there's a long history of adding spam blogs to this article by a variety of sock accounts. Can't find any other sources. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:09, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom and simple:Akash Nanda was also deleted Laura240406 (talk) 11:40, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Practicing lawyer, nothing showing notability. Search only brings up social media accounts. Appears PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 14:34, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'd like to note, for the record, that the creator attempted to short-circuit this discussion by moving the page into draftspace within a few hours of the initial nomination — I've reverted the move, since that's not how the AFD process works, but wanted it on the record. Individual lawyers are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, but this is not citing any WP:GNG-worthy reliable sourcing to establish notability here, and it can't just stay in draft form since I'm not seeing anything in a Google search that suggests any kind of salvageability. Bearcat (talk) 16:03, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: WP:SNOW and could have been A7. - The9Man ^Talk 17:33, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and above comments. Surayeproject3 (talk) 00:52, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: Clear advertisement and spam by a blocked user. Wp:SNOW is applicable here. Zuck28 (talk) 17:56, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: it's spam about a non-notable lawyer. For the record, I have just removed two bad sources from the article, a blatantly promotional piece on medium & the same piece on a webpage with no explanation of who published it & more ads than text. UrielAcosta (talk) 18:28, 7 July 2025 (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.