Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gyan Prakash Upadhyaya


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscmscrutinize, talk 17:07, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Gyan Prakash Upadhyaya

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Being an Indian Administrative Service officer is just a government job and doesn't automatically confer notability as per WP:SNG. Also, the individual clearly does not meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Charlie (talk) 18:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:51, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Charlie (talk) 18:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:21, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: An analysis of available reference material may be more helpful than a debate over the specifics of the job. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:15, 20 October 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 15:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. I would imagine the more significant role would be his position as member of his nation’s cabinet rather than merely an IAS officer. I know US cabinet members pass WP:NPOL, and I can’t see a reason why cabinet members from other nations shouldn’t either.4meter4 (talk) 19:29, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:NPOL Lightburst (talk) 16:23, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I'm not sure this meets the letter of NPOL: this individual is a bureaucrat, not a politician in the conventional sense of a holder of elected office. However, his position appears to be that of the highest-ranking bureaucrat in a state government, if I understand the minutiae correctly, and as such he is holding a statewide office: so I think he meets the spirit of NPOL. The coverage is very sparse, so this is a "weak" keep only. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete fails in WP:NPOL ,Indian Administrative Service officer is just a job not a notablity criteria Worldiswide (talk) 05:13, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: Sourcing used is simply confirmation of the appointment to the job. Nothing for sourcing we can use. Oaktree b (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2023 (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.