Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haridas Chaudhuri


 * 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The result was   keep, withdrawn. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:05, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Haridas Chaudhuri

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No good references since 2012. No referenced evidence of notability. I also removed a lot of essaylike hagiographical writing from the text. If this person is as notable as the article claims, we would expect clear evidence from verifiable third-party reliable sources to have been added some time in the past four years. If the high-quality references can be brought. this might be saveable. - David Gerard (talk) 19:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Withdrawn - Cheers to those who dug up the prima facie notability - David Gerard (talk) 09:46, 25 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep The Bibliography section of the article includes a link to a detailed biographical profile in the Encyclopedia of Hinduism. I see that as a strong claim to notability, which can be transformed to an inline reference in a matter of minutes. Cullen328   Let's discuss it  21:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. I added three references, two of them to encyclopedias, and one to a publication by the University of Chicago. This individual is notable, it's just that no-one has put in the effort to put in citations. Perhaps a higher proportion of relevant reliable citations are offline for this type of topic, than for some other topics. But inclusion of biographical articles in multiple encyclopedias confirms clearly that the individual is notable. --Presearch (talk) 21:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per the above. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 00:12, 25 June 2016 (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.