Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I. H. Sangam Dev (2nd nomination)

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 speedy delete as G6 by Justlettersandnumbers (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)‎. (non-admin closure) hinnk (talk) 23:22, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I. H. Sangam Dev

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Undersourced, promotional, personal biography, all references are first party. This article detracts from the overall quality of Wikipedia. JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 00:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Karnataka. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fifteen years of this sticking around; definitely not much of an article, but props to whoever got this BLP to stick around that long unchanged (and its simplicity could be a lesson to a lot of these editors who throw obvious paid WP:RESUME articles that are regulars here). Nathannah • 📮 00:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The nominator, immediately after starting this nomination, also attempted to intitate a PROD with the rationale This article has had a deletion consensus for over 15 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/I._H._Sangam_Dev. I procedurally declined the PROD; not only is it not allowed to have both processes going simultaneously, but any article previously discussed at AfD — and this is not the first article at this title — is also ineligible for PROD. (I have no opinion on the article itself at this time.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete, wouldn't an article with consensus this old fall under G6? It should've been deleted 15 years ago. -Samoht27 (talk) 17:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decided to go and nominate for CSD under this criteria. -Samoht27 (talk) 19:32, 6 May 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.