Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Sinha Roy


 * 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. Procedural close as page was deleted per request from article creator. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (talk) 12:30, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Annie Sinha Roy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROD was removed by page creator because the times of india will check if the person is a quack. That has nothing to do with notability. Only sources are interviews. Doesn't pass WP:GNG Galobtter (talk) 10:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * -It eludes me why you choose to reference my statements out of context;

Since you raised doubts as to the particular source, I mentioned in the edit summary that TOI has sufficient editorial judgement not to write about quacks. The first statement in the article Annie Sinhala Roy is India's only female tunnel engineer is directly referenced from the interview .This goes to show that the interview itself is not disqualified as a reliable source (Unlike interviews by Arnab Goswami) and that the facts said in the interview have been verified (It is a claim that the person did not make in the interview rather one which TOI made).If you read thoroughly there are also other sources some of which reference the same interview.- 10:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not raising doubts about the source - this was my PROD statement "Non-notable, as only source is an interview." The interview is reliable, but that's nothing to do with notability of a person. Galobtter (talk) 10:55, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:50, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:50, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak keep As the content is correct but only one news agency which has different website gave coverage. Marvellous Spider-Man  16:22, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * An interview doesn't count as coverage for WP:GNG. Galobtter (talk) 16:41, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Why did they take her interview if she is not notable? Marvellous Spider-Man  16:57, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Lots of people are interviewed if they have a interesting story to tell. That doesn't mean they're notable; reread WP:GNG. Galobtter (talk) 05:25, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Instead of linking GNG please add a tq ed portion of the relevant guidelines which states what you have just said (interveiw do not add to the notability of the subject).Thanks-(User:Forceradical on Mobile)_103.242.190.125 (talk) 06:25, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Interviews are not independent as all the material except for the questions is straight from the person. "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. Even if we did consider an interview to be coverage, it would only count as one piece of coverage as all the other websites appear to be using the same interview, and it's not sustained coverage - we'll need at least 2 or 3 different pieces of coverage on the person. Being in the news does not in itself mean that someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article. Galobtter (talk) 07:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete interviews are not indepdent reliable source coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:41, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Insufficient coverage of any depth or persistence in reliable sources to pass the most basic WP:ANYBIO criteria. &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  09:52, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy deleted by WP:G7 request from the article creator. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:16, 13 November 2017 (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.