Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ajai R. Singh (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. JohnCD (talk) 20:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Ajai R. Singh
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Really a puff piece: a scientist with a number of hobbies, but no evidence to suggest that he passes PROF or the GNG: the sourcing consists of Who's Who and a bunch of websites, most of them the subject's own. Drmies (talk) 04:25, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, per WP:TNT. Some debate is possible on whether this would meet WP:PROF#8: "The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major well-established academic journal in their subject area." Singh is EIC of Mens Sana Monographs, which meets WP:NJournals. However, although MSM is notable, it really only just scrapes by and it certainly is not a "major well-established academic journal". Given the current state of this article (and without any appreciably better version in the article history), I think it is basically unsalvageable and should be nuked. --Randykitty (talk) 07:54, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:38, 19 June 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  &#40; Talk &#41;  18:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable. The claimed books are called  "Monographs," but that usually refers to a substantial scientific work--which these are not. The journal is edits is published by Medknow, which is not a major scientific publisher. The article on Mens Sana Monographs needs some improvement to indicate its borderline status.  DGG ( talk ) 00:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)


 * 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.