Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dinesh Swamy

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. —SpacemanSpiff 06:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dinesh Swamy

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

Smells like self-promotion. Is this guy actually notable? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This article would require a Heymann's standard improvement to make me change my mind. There are twenty references there, though they're not inline.--Laun chba ller 13:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Being a BLP article, this requires adequate inline citations before it can be considered usable, otherwise it will look purely promotional. Improve, then try again. {_C A S U K I T E ^T} 15:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think sticking this in userspace or AfCspace until it is suitable would be any good?--Laun chba ller 15:46, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article's don't require inline references to be notable. That would be nice but AfD is based on the sources, not the style of the sources. --Green Cardamom (talk) 18:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right, notability depends on the existence of sources, not on whether or not those sources are included, and much less on how they are included. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 03:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Extremely weak keep. Barely passes WP:G11 in my opinion. However, it does pass and afd is not cleanup. WP:BLPPROD is also not an option, because there are references, even if they are not inline. So notability is the only grounds for deletion here. But there seems to be a little significant coverage. [1], [2], and [3], [4] are examples. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 20:32, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 03:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I think subject is unnotable. The sources are all advertising companies and not real news sources. Plus it is fairly promotional.--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 15:11, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - significant parts of the article are copy-pasted from Swamy's LinkedIn profile and he seems to be claiming sole credit for any successes by the companies he's worked for. Really this is a CV of someone who is clearly beginning to make their presence felt in Indian advertising, but not notable yet. Sionk (talk) 03:44, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not notable yet, maybe never will be. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 19:36, 26 October 2013 (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.