Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashneer Grover


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 18:00, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Ashneer Grover

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

End-to-end WP:PROMO, Fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO. WP:UPE and WP:SPA suspected. This entity's page has been attempted multiple times in the past. It's high time to WP:SALT this page. - Hatchens (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 16:38, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey, I just saw that you had proposed this page for deletion. Coming to the part of his notability, he is currently discussed most in India as he is one of the judges of the recently successful show Shark Tank India. You can explore on google and see lots of articles covered on him by mainstream Indian media, and even I have attached sources from mainstream media news articles only. There is no promotion/ advertisement, and I am not paid for doing this. The page will improve as more edits are made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aarshgangulwar (talk • contribs) 17:45, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: Reads like an ad, already deleted once for A7 and G11.  Bsoyka  ( talk &middot;  contribs ) 17:47, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, I think purely from a notability perspective the subject has significance. Efforts of genuine contributors should not be eclipsed by that of marketers trying to get a page. Amitized (talk) 04:51, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, it has a ton of coverage in reliable sources Google News. User:Krishfiji (User talk:Krishfiji) 14:00, 23 February 2022 (GMT+12)
 * Comment: The entity is having high intensity negative coverage on Google News but none of them has been used in creating this page. Even if those negative news has been used, the page would had been duly classified as an "ATTACK PAGE". Besides that, a particular statement in the article "Then by 2018, he established his own company BharatPe" is actually an effort to put an "Strong Assertion" about his ownership to drive a counter narrative against the other owners and investors of the company (as both the camps are currently involved in ownership battle). Secondly, the whole page has subtle bend towards what the entity wants others to perceive about him, a classic WP:NPOV violation which we can make it out by the following statement (in the article); Grover claimed that it's a fake audio by “some scamster trying to extort funds (USD 2,40,000 bitcoins)” and added that he “refused to buckle.” -Hatchens (talk) 04:44, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Article satisfies WP:NBIO. Coverage of Grover includes BharatPe, the ongoing controversy including him and his wife, the controversy over the Nykaa IPO, his role on Shark Tank India and also there has been coverage about him being the primary entity in numerous memes. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:02, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm confused at the moment. A plethora of coverage exists there about "his wife" (okay) but notability is not inherited but there is seriously an abundance of coverage on him in several reliable sources like ThePrint, Mint, Indian Express and Hindustan Times, and I'm not able to review them independently right now. Most likely I'll take some time in the morning and be back with my analysis. Best, ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  19:13, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Page Sources Analysis (the ones which are existing on the page, as on February 27, 2022)

-Hatchens (talk) 03:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * This whole page building is nothing but a coordinated approach to control and manage the reputation of this entity which has taken a beating lately. In the page, as well as, in this discussion IDs are trying to justify his fame through Shark Tank India which is nothing but to use the "Shark Tank Fame to Ride Out BharatPe Controversy". If his real controversies are used; the page can be easily expanded but that will not be allowed by his team because as we speak (at this moment), the AfD tag was duly removed by an WP:SPA -.


 * Also, kindly note, if we look at through the Shark Tank India's angle; this entity's co-patriots a.k.a. other judges/sharks - there had been constant effort to get the individual pages up in last couple of months and most of them had been either rejected, blocked or protected; Anupam Mittal (PP protected), Draft:Aman Gupta and his company Draft:BoAt, Namita Thapar (creator of the page blocked for covert advertising), Peyush Bansal (required administrator access, indefinite), and Vineeta Singh's company SUGAR Cosmetics (deleted multiple times). We can easily conclude, this is either a coordinated effort at an entity's individual level or combined effort on behalf Shark Tank India to get Wikipedia pages for all above mentioned entities in a single time-frame. -Hatchens (talk) 04:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Out of sheer desperation has attempted to perform non-admin closure of this discussion. That too they have failed to execute because of lack of expertise. -Hatchens (talk) 04:09, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. Peyush Bansal was deleted three times between 2015 and 2017. The last attempts at creating Namita Thapar and SUGAR Cosmetics were in 2020. All of this happened well before Shark Tank India was even conceptualised. BoAt makes a very reasonable claim for notability (market leader; decent media coverage; filed papers to go public a few weeks ago), although that was not the case when it was first deleted in 2019. The only pages published during this timeframe are of three sharks, viz. Grover, Mittal and Gupta. It seems like newbie editors were influenced by Shark Tank's popularity and the social media memefest that it has triggered, and decided to create articles for them without understanding the notability criteria. This is consistent with what happens on Wikipedia when reality shows are being aired. I would recommend assuming good faith here, unless you have evidence to support loaded claims like there being a "coordinated effort" to push these articles. M4DU7 (talk) 08:03, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

The page is about Indian Entrepreneur. As he is currently one of the most discussed Entity in Indian Media. The page has sufficient reliable source and not about promoting someone as it has criticism too. Srander 17:11, 37 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt per nom. Deb (talk) 12:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt Per nominator. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:52, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve He is co-founder of well-known brand BharatPe and recently he came a public figure on Shark Tank India. I saw lot of useless wikipedia page for many unpopular peoples than why not him. I suggest to keep the page and improve it with reliable source. Religiousmyth (talk) 06:05, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete He is one of the thousands entrepreneur in India. Some coverege in the entertainment news portals as he was a grumpy "shark" in a reality TV show. Neurofreak (talk) 07:55, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:TOOSOON. I can see why some of the keep voters and commenters are confused. Grover has been in the news every single day on every single news outlet for the past couple of months. He has become a household name thanks to the string of controversies, so I'm not surprised that people have tried to create an article for him. However, being in the news alone does not confer notability; the coverage has mostly revolved around controversies, which can be covered at BharatPe for now. Looked at the edit history but couldn't find any attempt to whitewash the article; the controversies have been there since the article was created. Therefore I would assume good faith and not cast aspersions. M4DU7 (talk) 08:03, 2 March 2022 (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.