Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dilip P. Gaonkar


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Erik9 (talk) 16:24, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Dilip P. Gaonkar

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

Keep the updates since my nomination show that he is notable A new name 2008 (talk) 01:48, 14 March 2009 (UTC) Fails to meet inclusion guidelines for academics. No references to show he is notable. A new name 2008 (talk) 02:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —David Eppstein (talk) 04:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete . Does not seem to pass notability requirements under WP:PROF or WP:BIO. Citation impact seems to be very low. No books listed on WorldCat. News coverage practically nonexistent. --Eric Yurken (talk) 01:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Changed to keep based on the results of the modified search by Madcoverboy. Meets WP:PROF criterion #1 (significant impact in scholarly discipline, broadly construed). I’ve also re-done my WorldCat search with a few variations, and found two scholarly books with more than 200 holdings worldwide; one published by Routledge (247 holdings) and the other by Duke University Press (201 holdings). Given the publishers and the fact that the books are in very specific topics, these holdings reinforce my belief that he meets criterion #1.--Eric Yurken (talk) 19:33, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Use a correct query: At least 3 books, 76 articles, and several hundred citations. Obvious notability. Madcoverboy (talk) 18:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Does not meet notability guidelines. ₳dam   Zel  20:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete notability not established.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Despite a an obvious institutional conflict of interest on my part, Prof. Gaonkar is a notable scholar and (co)author/editor of at least 12 books and 76 articles: gScholar results Amazon results. Obviously a rhetorician isn't going to have any impact factor in something like Web of Science; one would no more measure an elephant with a teaspoon. Madcoverboy (talk) 18:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- Abecedare (talk) 01:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:PROF, as established by User:Madcoverboy and User:Eric Yurken. Abecedare (talk) 01:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable author, academician, and also quoted in several academic books see here --Ekabhishek (talk) 08:33, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. At the beginning, the article failed to describe Gaonkar. It looks okay now. He may be an Associate professor, but has some good citations in Goggle. He is also grandson of two notable people on Wikipedia. May be he has inherited writings from his grandfather SAPA. Gaonkar. It may be updated showing some comparison study among people in his field. Athos, Porthos, and Aramis (talk) 15:11, 14 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.