Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ved Prakash Upadhyay (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 delete‎. RL0919 (talk) 23:05, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ved Prakash Upadhyay

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)

This article was created by a confirmed sockpuppet identified in the SPI case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Lazy-restless/Archive. The creation by a blocked user tied to the "Lazy-restless" investigation suggests potential WP:POV pushing. The subject does not meet WP:GNG, as no sources provide sufficient coverage. NXcrypto Message 12:45, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Major portion of this article sources copied by sock from deleted articles, see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalki Avatar Aur Muhammad Saheb, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalki Avatar and Muhammad (book) (3rd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalki Avatar and Muhammad (book) (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalki Avtar aur Muhammad sahib (book). It was also spammed by Lazy-restless IPs and socks, e.g., Hindi Wiki (history) using IP 202.134.10.142, IP 202.134.10.136, IP 202.134.10.131, IP 202.134.11.228, and Assad Jibran (blocked as a Lazy-restless sock). Created by Lazy-restless on Malayalam Wiki (history), Turkish Wiki (history), Fiji Hindi Wiki (history), Malay Wiki (history), Urdu Wiki (history), Arabic Wiki (history), Punjabi Wiki (history with IP 103.66.169.1), Sanskrit Wiki (history with IP 202.134.11.228 and IP 103.230.104.41), and Kashmiri Wiki (history with IP 103.230.106.29). All tied to the banned user IP range, and the majority of these IPs are blocked. NXcrypto Message 13:20, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Hinduism, and India. Shellwood (talk) 13:29, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I see no links in Jstor or Gscholar about this individual, the rest of the sourcing doesn't seem appropriate for a scholar. Oaktree b (talk) 14:35, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Still not notable. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 15:04, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Punjab, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:57, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No sources are indicative of the person being a scholar or for that matter being notable Flyingphoenixchips (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 03:30, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Insufficient coverage by independent, reliable secondary sources to pass WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:09, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I received an email from User:Abdullahil Hai saying, "Please see [1]". Just noting this here so people are aware of any potential canvassing. – DreamRimmer (talk) 03:16, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I did also. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:38, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Abdullahil Hai has now been blocked for sockpuppetry. NXcrypto Message 04:54, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the evidence I presented at the first AfD which was closed as no consensus and “a train wreck” by Liz. Read it and your eyes will bleed: meatpuppets and sockpuppets galore with lots of personal attacks. The nominator was subsequently banned. I will try to dig up my refs and post them here tomorrow. The subject of this article tried to find common theological ground between Islam and Hinduism which was anathema to partisans on both sides. This AfD is off to a more civil start — fingers crossed. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:53, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest an admin lock this to ECP editing only to prevent trouble. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 22:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So far, so good. If it becomes a big problem we can protect it then. -- asilvering (talk) 21:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

canvassing ? NXcrypto Message 19:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@NXcrypto, see my comment in this discussion yesterday (above). A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:03, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The argument that was mainly used by the Keep supporters during the last AfD was that the subject is a winner of Rashtrapati Award, but that award is political, not an academic award. There are no sources that have justified the existence of this article. CharlesWain (talk) 05:59, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and WP:NAUTHOR. I don't see anything convincing in the last AfD. This individual is yet to win a notable academic honour. Captain AmericanBurger1775 (talk) 18:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP, enough referencing for the article. Any conflicting in contents should be addressed in the article. --محمود (talk) 11:48, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP- हिमाल सुबेदी (talk) 11:51, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and probably salt given what an absolute mess this is. 90 percent of the article is about the subject's most well-known book, which according to the last four AFD discussions [2] [3] [4] [5] is almost certainly not notable. Take that away and there's no case for meeting WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NACADEMIC. Astaire (talk) 20:40, 2 April 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.