Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C. P. John


 * 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. — Cactus Writer (talk) 20:50, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

C. P. John

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:GNG Failed to pass WP:POLITICIAN Padavalam Kuttan Pilla   Talk  18:13, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Padavalam Kuttan Pilla   Talk  18:13, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  Padavalam Kuttan Pilla   Talk  18:13, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:50, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete The article fails WP:NPOL, WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG.S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 14:22, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES. My understanding of the consensus is that, absent significant coverage, officials of political parties of this size, like this subject, are not automatically notable. Bearian (talk) 17:31, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Lefcentreright  Talk  (plz ping) 19:52, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep No evidence whatsoever of any WP:BEFORE carried out, prominent political figure in Kerala, subject has held numerous notable positions, 2IC of large national student organisation, extensive writing, frequently quoted in national press over the last 20+ years.   . Clearly major content issues, but AfD is not cleanup.--Goldsztajn (talk) 00:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, the article needs a cleanup, but notability can easily be established. CP John is a known personality in Kerala politics, leader of a party, see interview here for example, https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Kochi/ldf-govts-priorities-skewed-says-cp-john/article26094746.ece, 'former member of State Planning Board' (https://www.cppr.in/centre-for-comparative-studies/kerala-politicians-miffed-with-budget-say-it-is-unrealistic-and-favouring-corporates-the-news-minute-february-2-2018), http://www.keralaarchitecturefestival.com/news_more.aspx?id=NDE1&year=2019 --Soman (talk) 01:28, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, qedk (t 桜 c) 07:17, 25 February 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 02:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: As not notable and failing WP:NPOL. In the interest of taking steps to ensure that systemic bias of sources is not a weighing factor I looked at this. "First", since it is already listed at AFD, I looked at the references. This immediately involved assuming some good faith because the first reference requires paying to read it so I marked it as such. The second reference is a dead link, and the third appears to be a self-reference. The last reference shows the names and pictures of 14 men and 1 woman. Being the sixth day of a second relisting, this is my take from the visual of the images as I didn't look if that is politically correct for any gender identity. What I didn't see was "C. P. John" so I scanned the page for "Cheruvathoor Poulose John" that I didn't see. This means a would be appropriate.
 * Of the three sources I had one "possible" so I looked for sources. Before I go into the "Before", I would like to mention this. The criteria is not as hard-line as made out to be by some. WP:BEFORE (D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability, #1) states: The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects. #2 states: If you find a lack of sources, you've completed basic due diligence before nominating. However, if a quick search does find sources, this does not always mean an AfD on a sourcing basis is unwarranted. If you spend more time examining the sources and determine that they are insufficient, e.g., because they only contain passing mention of the topic, then an AfD nomination may still be appropriate. There are two easy ways to have a discussion: A)- assume good faith, be civil and ask if in doubt, B)- roll up the sleeves and do battle. It is stated as fact above, "No evidence whatsoever of any WP:BEFORE carried out", but when I performed the search as per above ("C. P. John"), that is the subject title and anyone can argue six days a week and twice on Sunday but when the dust settles, it still satisfies #2 of "WP:BEFORE" above. I found this article, one titled Communist Marxist Party (John), Twitter, facebook, and economictimes.indiatimes.com, that didn't produce anything significant, so I backed out and regrouped. I went a step further and searched "Cheruvathoor Poulose John". My point is: please assume good faith and if there are doubts ask before pulling out the guns and grenades, or jumping to the other ASSume.
 * Cheruvathoor Poulose John:
 * Sources found. In this I found some mentioning like the telegraphindia.com (I saw listed above), but my goal was geared to spend more time examining the sources and determine that they are insufficient, e.g., because they only contain passing mention of the topic, or reliable and substantive as well as to examine sources to ensure there is not just refbombing.
 * "What I found: The lead states he is a writer and the body includes, "He has continued to publish widely on the socio-economic issues facing Kerala". This is not backed up by reliable sourcing, has weasel wording (publish widely), and I didn't find any sources to back this up. I did find sources concerning a single book the subject authored, CMP general secretary CP John's biography of Rosa Luxemburg launched. This does not pass the criteria of WP:NAUTHOR.
 * The party John co-founded, the Communist Marxist Party (CMP), and became the General Secretary of, would seem to be what would advance notability. I became confused when I read the source Can Kerala campus politics be freed from stranglehold of parties.... I assumed this article was about a national party, maybe something regional, but, unless someone has opposing evidence, is a campus or university political organization, a "splinter faction" of the CMP, the Communist Marxist Party Kerala State Committee that the subject led, that supposedly represents the Students Federation of India (SFI).
 * Conclusion: I just do not see notability for the subject. I do not find anything particularly notable about being a "Member of the Kerala State Planning Board", nothing relevant on being a writer, and founding or being the General Secretary of a splinter group of a school (college, university) does not seem to pass any notability criteria. Otr500 (talk) 18:56, 10 March 2020 (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.