Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debdas Acharya


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 18:33, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Debdas Acharya

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. Does not indicate the notability of the subject and I cannot locate any sources that are WP:RS. All this while ignoring the obvious formatting issues and cleanup needed if there were reliable sources. FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 20:48, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  20:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  20:57, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Poorly-written crap which seems like an attempt to promote the subject. I wouldn't even expect any disagreement on this one. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:05, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Have performed a small bit of clean-up, including stub sorting, as this article should stay or go based on the notability of the subject, not its formatting. - Dravecky (talk) 08:32, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - Thanks for the cleanup. I shouldn't speak for others, but I believe MezzoMezzo means "poorly-written crap" to include formatting AND notability. Stating that it is written in an attempt to promote the subject leads me to believe they meant that it is written to make it look notable while it is in fact not notable. Articles definitely should not be deleted based on formatting (trust me, we would have twice as many in AfD if we did). Regardless, thanks for the cleanup. Based on your edits, what is your though on the notability of the article which is the reason why we are here now? Thanks. --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 12:20, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply - Still support deletion. It's unsourced and based on searching, I don't think it's notable at all. MezzoMezzo (talk) 08:58, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails WP:GNG. Even trying to decipher the intended topic of the article was a struggle! 1292simon (talk) 12:52, 2 May 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.