Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. P. Rathna Swamy


 * 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. NorthAmerica1000 12:58, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Dr. P. Rathna Swamy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Biography of an academic and civil servant who does not appear to meet notability requirements, neither WP:PROF nor Notability (people). His name can be spelt Rathnaswamy or Rathna Swamy, and I have looked for sources using both spellings, but not found anything that indicates that he meets WP:GNG. bonadea contributions talk 11:20, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  16:17, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  16:17, 18 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete. This could be deleted in accordance with WP:CSD, because no credible assertion of significance is made in the article. The only sources available appear to be the subject's own works. I find nothing that constitutes significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:44, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable either as a academic or Civil Servant.ரவீந்திரன்
 * Delete. Whoever wrote this (seemingly the subject) has little idea about how notability and sourcing work nor about the proper content for a biographic encyclopedia article. It is very cluttered with indiscriminate minor accomplishments, footnotes that don't mention the subject, and long unsourced essay-like sections. Any notability that might exist here is well hidden. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:44, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete – per WP:OR. Lack of secondary content. – Margin1522 (talk) 23:38, 21 December 2014 (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.