Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darius Sunawala


 * 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   no consensus.  MBisanz  talk 00:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Darius Sunawala

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Declined speedy. Local DJs are inherently non-notable. One needs many reliable, independent sources *where the person is the primary subject* to clear that hurdle. That does not appear to be the case here. Yes, there are mentions of this fellow in the Hindu Times, but virtually every one of them mentions him in passing. An article covering an event where this guy made a brief appearance as a presenter is inadequate coverage. DarkAudit (talk) 02:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete per nom. THF (talk) 03:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. For clarity, he's not a "local DJ", but rather a radio personality and radio station program director.  Gnews finds a few reliable sources,, but I think it's safe to say there'd be a lot more hits for an American media personality of similar stature.  We need to take care to avoid systemic bias when evaluating the notability of non-Western subjects.  Baileypalblue (talk) 03:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply I'd say a program director would be even less notable than a DJ. A "radio personality" is a DJ. Don't parse my words. Looking at the write-up for Fever 104 FM, it sure looks like a local station to me. local is local, no matter where "local" may be. I checked Google News before I ever made the nomination. Just mentioning the guy for handing out an award is not sufficient coverage when the story is about the award, and not the presenter. DarkAudit (talk) 03:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Further Reply Do you have an actual reason to keep this article beyond accusing me of bias for being a "Westerner"? DarkAudit (talk) 04:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Not accusing you of anything -- everybody has to be aware of CSB problems while editing. It's your job to demonstrate a valid rationale for deletion, and so far you haven't done so.  "Inherently non-notable" is a bad argument, and standard methods of measuring notability via sourcing don't work well for this type of subject.  The article should be kept because it covers a notable media personality; again, if this were an American media personality of similar stature, I don't think this would even be an issue.  Baileypalblue (talk) 04:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I have to agree there. Multiple sources about the subject is one way to establish notability, but surely not the only one. Also, while it might not be a good idea to cover everything in the world, I have yet to find anything that is inherently non-notable. You might be thinking of verifiability. - Mgm|(talk) 10:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * When I talk of "inherently non-notable" here I mean that you're going to get lots of local press for a "radio personality" because he's, well, local. But go an hour or two down the highway in any direction, where that station may not reach, and you may be hard pressed to find anyone who cares one way or the other about the guy. You're certainly not going to see much in the way of media coverage about him once you get out that far. He's a big-city DJ,and the *local* press amounts to as much. Trivial coverage where he just happened to appear at an event that was the real focus of that coverage. The American DJs who are notable enough to warrant an article all have national audiences at numerous radio stations across the country. A guy at a single station in a single city, with media coverage to match, wouldn't. DarkAudit (talk) 14:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * There's non non-local coverage clause for individuals as there is for organizations, but if there was one, this subject would not be a good test case for it. He's a media personality in Bangalore, the capital of Karnataka, which is larger than any US city except New York, and which has more population than about half of the world's countries.  His current radio station (Fever 104 FM) broadcasts nationally; he previously worked at one of the largest radio networks in the world.  Your suggestion that if you go an hour or two outside Bangalore people won't care about him is implausible, but even if true he'd still have "a large fan base" available in Bangalore (one of the criteria of WP:ENTERTAINER).   Baileypalblue (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Just because the number is big, doesn't make it useful. The way I read that Fever 104 writeup, it's more of a collection of local stations under one banner name, each city with it's own set of personalities. By your standards, we would have articles on any DJ that works in a major city. I say that a DJ in NYC might be big in NYC, but in Philly, or even Trenton, you'd get "who?". DarkAudit (talk) 18:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Not every radio personality, just the culturally significant ones. Sunawala appears to have been considered one of the top two RJs in Bangalore along with Sunaina Lall.  The fact that there are fawning celebrity articles on him suggests he's more culturally significant than the non-notable RJs who should be excluded.  The fact that he's cited in articles on unrelated subjects suggests he's more influential than the average non-notable RJ.  There's plenty of evidence available online which is not exactly suitable for use in the article, but nevertheless provides indirect evidence of notability.  Baileypalblue (talk) 18:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom unless other sources/info surfaces that can change my !vote  §hawn poo   05:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: trivial coverage. JamesBurns (talk) 09:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Several of the articles found by the Google News search linked above are in fact largely about the subject, including The Hindu saying that he "needs no introduction", which is a pretty obvious statement of notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I must agree with Phil Bridger. This person has had multiple, independent sources that show his notability. He's attacted celebrity and notice.  Normally, DJs and the like aren't notable, but this seems to be an exception. Bearian (talk) 00:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Pastor Theo (talk) 02:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  --  Ray  Talk 04:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  --  Ray  Talk 04:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I find Baileypalblue and Phil Bridger's arguments compelling. Whilst the range of 'local' coverage is limited, the 'local' area of Bangalore is enormous, US State size. WP:ENTERTAINER talks about Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following, and the local article imply this level of fandom, at least in the past, ti give notability. -- Ged UK  14:20, 13 March 2009 (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.