Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Disability

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Disability. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Disability|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Disability. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to People.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Disability/archive

watch

See also: Medicine-related deletions and Health and fitness-related deletions

Disability related deletion discussions

G.Uday Kiran

G.Uday Kiran (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Delete – This biography of a living person fails WP:GNG. The only sources cited are from a single outlet (News18 Telugu), one being a YouTube video and the other a text article of the same story, which fails WP:IRS independence requirements. The subject’s primary claim to notability is Wikipedia editing activity, which does not confer encyclopedic notability. The article is promotional in tone and lacks significant independent coverage. Nyxion³⁰³💬 Talk 15:25, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Nyxion³⁰³💬 Talk 15:25, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

The article also appears to have been written by the subject himself, which constitutes a clear conflict of interest per WP:COI, which would explain the promotional tone. Nyxion³⁰³💬 Talk 15:26, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:50, 2 January 2026 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Andhra Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:49, 2 January 2026 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disability-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:50, 2 January 2026 (UTC)
• Speedy delete: Does not meet WP:BIO. The only source here is the interview of the person themselves. -- Ab207 (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Text generated by a large language model or similar AI technology has been collapsed in line with the relevant guideline and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Oppose deletion.

The assertion that the article clearly fails WP:GNG is premature. While the current sourcing is limited, the presence of coverage by News18 Telugu, a nationally recognized media outlet, indicates initial independent media recognition. Per WP:BEFORE, articles should not be deleted without giving editors a reasonable opportunity to improve sourcing, particularly when potential additional independent sources may exist.

The subject’s notability is not based solely on Wikipedia editing activity. The media coverage focuses on the subject’s broader personal journey and volunteer contribution in a digital knowledge context, which constitutes human-interest coverage rather than routine self-promotion.

Concerns regarding WP:COI are speculative and, even if applicable, do not justify deletion. Wikipedia policy is clear that conflict of interest issues are addressed through neutral rewriting and editorial cleanup, not removal of the article.

Any promotional tone or neutrality issues fall under WP:NPOV and WP:TONE and can be resolved through editing. For biographies of living persons, WP:BLP favors correction and improvement over deletion when issues are fixable.

In summary, the issues raised are remediable through sourcing and tone improvements. Therefore, the article should be kept and improved rather than deleted. User: ఉదయ్ కిరణ్ (User talk:ఉదయ్ కిరణ్) Oppose deletion.

The claim that this biography clearly fails WP:GNG is not conclusive. While the current sourcing is limited, the article cites coverage from News18 Telugu, a well-established national news outlet. The existence of such coverage indicates at least initial independent media recognition. Per WP:BEFORE, deletion discussions should consider whether issues are remediable through improvement, especially when additional independent sources may reasonably exist.

The subject’s notability is not based solely on Wikipedia editing activity. The cited media coverage focuses on the subject’s broader life journey, socio-economic background, and volunteer contribution to digital knowledge dissemination. In the Indian context, mainstream media coverage of grassroots digital volunteers is not routine and should not be dismissed as trivial or purely internal recognition.

Concerns raised regarding WP:COI are speculative. Even if a conflict of interest were present, Wikipedia policy is clear that COI is not, by itself, grounds for deletion. The appropriate response is neutral rewriting, editorial oversight, and removal of promotional language, not removal of the article.

Allegations of promotional tone fall under WP:NPOV and WP:TONE. These are content and style issues that are routinely addressed through cleanup and rewriting. They do not justify deletion when the underlying subject may still meet notability criteria.

With respect to WP:BLP, policy favors accuracy, balance, and improvement over deletion when problems are fixable. There is no indication of unsourced negative material or policy-violating content that would necessitate removal.

In summary, the issues identified—limited sourcing, potential COI, and tone—are all remediable. Notability has not been conclusively disproven. Therefore, the article should be kept and improved rather than deleted. User: ఉదయ్ కిరణ్

In-depth explanation (English) The significance of the subject cannot be reduced solely to Wikipedia editing activity. While Wikipedia policy is clear that editing the encyclopedia alone does not automatically confer notability, that principle does not apply in isolation in this case. The article does not rely merely on internal Wikipedia metrics or edit counts; rather, it is supported by independent media coverage that situates the subject’s activities within a broader social and personal context. The cited media coverage focuses on the subject’s wider life journey, including his socio-economic background and his voluntary contribution to the dissemination of digital knowledge. The narrative presented by the media is not limited to technical editing activity but highlights the human dimension of participation in open knowledge initiatives—particularly the challenges and achievements of an individual from an underprivileged background engaging in voluntary digital work with limited resources. In the Indian context, mainstream media coverage of grassroots-level digital volunteers is not routine. National and regional news outlets typically prioritize political figures, entertainment personalities, corporate leaders, or sensational events. Coverage that instead highlights ordinary individuals contributing voluntarily to digital knowledge ecosystems represents a departure from routine reporting and carries clear human-interest significance. Such coverage should therefore not be dismissed as trivial, routine, or merely internal recognition within the Wikipedia community. Importantly, the recognition discussed here originates from an independent media organization, not from Wikipedia itself or from self-published sources. This distinction is central to the application of the General Notability Guideline, which emphasizes significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. When a news organization devotes attention to an individual’s background, motivations, and societal context, this goes beyond a passing mention and constitutes meaningful coverage. From a policy perspective, this places the subject in a gray area where notability has not been conclusively established, but neither has it been conclusively disproven. In such cases, Wikipedia norms—particularly as reflected in WP:BEFORE—favor allowing time and space for improvement, expansion, and the addition of further independent sources rather than immediate deletion. In summary, characterizing the subject’s significance as being based solely on Wikipedia editing activity oversimplifies the situation and overlooks the broader social and cultural context reflected in the media coverage. Given the non-routine nature of such coverage in India and its focus on the subject’s life journey and voluntary contribution to digital knowledge, the subject’s notability should not be dismissed as trivial or purely internal recognition. User: ఉదయ్ కిరణ్

• Delete: Promotional and no indication of notability. ... discospinster _talk 02:32, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPERSON. --Seawolf35 ^T--C 07:29, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
• Delete – Blatant WP:PROMO. Svartner (talk) 14:46, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
• Delete: Sections like 'Future Aspirations' are a gross violation of WP:CRYSTAL. Further, as it turns out, the person about whom this article is a biography of, has created the article himself. This violates WP:COI. Check out its history page page to verify. Astley101 (talk) 18:06, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
• Delete: Promotional auto biography. Fails GNG & SIGCOV. Zuck28 (talk) 23:56, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Disability related proposed deletions

• Height dysphoria (via WP:PROD on 11 September 2023)