Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chitra Thiyagarajan


 * 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. Jujutacular (talk) 18:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Chitra Thiyagarajan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It is the device that is notable. The inventor requires more than a notable device under patent to be notable here. Fails notability. Fiddle  Faddle  11:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep- Yes device is under patent process. She is notable with this invention. Before this, she had two more invention. (Gokulchandola (talk) 11:44, 26 August 2013 (UTC))
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 19:08, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 19:08, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Insufficient sources, also insufficient for "invention". Xxanthippe (talk) 22:37, 26 August 2013 (UTC).
 * Delete. No evidence from subject related journals. asimkumar2222 (talk) 22:37, 26 August 2013 (UTC).
 * Keep - Yes she is notable. (182.68.231.169 (talk) 04:37, 29 August 2013 (UTC))
 * Delete per WP:NotJustYet. Mandalini (talk) 16:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete because even if the device she patented is barely notable enough to have an article, notability is WP:NOTINHERITED and until there are some sources about her then I feel is right with a WP:NotJustYet assessment. Technical 13 (talk) 15:19, 5 September 2013 (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.