Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arun Jhaveri


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 18:16, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Arun Jhaveri

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject fails WP:GNG. Article incorrectly de-prod'd by, who said failing notability is not a valid criterion for speedy deletion. That's correct, but PROD is for deletions that don't meet speedy criteria, as this one, where no objections are expected. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:50, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:51, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:51, 14 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep — I added several sources to the bottom of the stub. This isn't an obvious case where the subject clearly meets WP:POLITICIAN or WP:PROF, but the ongoing coverage over a span of time, from at least 1992 to the present, in several fields including politics, engineering, and climate change activism adds up to meet WP:GNG. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:09, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You cited two Seattle Times pieces, which are legit. India-West is legit too. His peer reviewed article in Energy & Ecology Business does not establish notability. (If peer reviewed publications contributed to notability, I'd deserve a Wikipage.) Same with SciTech Book News. I doubt that one page of "The Almanac Of Women And Minorities In American Politics" establishes much more than that he exists. His appearance in a debate shouldn't (I don't think) contribute to notability. So you're right that we should be having this discussion rather than PROD, but I don't think those three sources establish notability. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:35, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Burien, WA is not a large enough city to hand its mayors an automatic WP:NPOL pass just for existing, and the sourcing that's been added is not strong enough to grant him WP:GNG instead. Of the eight sources here, four of them contribute nothing toward the notability sweepstakes at all (inclusion in a directory doesn't count, an organization that he's directly involved in self-publishing its own press release about his involvement doesn't count, etc.) — and of the four that do count as reliable sources, two are just WP:ROUTINE coverage of his candidacy in the primary race for a congressional seat (which is not a claim of notability that gets a person into an encyclopedia in and of itself either), while the other two are routine coverage of his election as mayor in a local media outlet that would be expected to run coverage of local mayoral elections (by not nationalizing outside his own local media market, they fail to demonstrate that he's more notable than the norm for a smalltown mayor.) And as written, the body of the article consists solely of a single sentence asserting that he exists. No prejudice against recreation in November if he wins the congressional seat, but none of this, neither the sourcing nor the substance, gets him into Wikipedia as things stand today. Bearcat (talk) 17:25, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You said it better than I could. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:28, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails notability. Engleham (talk) 19:50, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as still nothing actually suggestive confirming his own independent notability. SwisterTwister   talk  06:51, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable mayor of a minor city.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:40, 23 July 2016 (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.