Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jagannath Dixit


 * 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) DannyS712 (talk) 01:08, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Jagannath Dixit

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Though there are mentions of the subject in several news articles. All the sources mentioned are about lectures/workshops delivered by the subject. Nothing about why the subject is notable? No secondary reference is given. I fear such third party source exists on the subject. So it does not pass WP:NACADEMIC  QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 18:04, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:06, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:06, 23 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep I cannot stop laughing when I read something like no secondary references are given! Surely the person making such claims should understand what WP means by secondary sources. I wish them good luck for study! -- Dr. Abhijeet Safai (talk) 18:35, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - The discussion regarding possibility of conflict of interest / paid editing of the account which has proposed this deletion is going on here. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 07:17, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:55, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Notable, however the article needs to be developed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lubbad85 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete Seems to be another right wing lunatic charlatan who chooses to undertake scientific research by the means of media-coverage rather than by publications in credible scientific journals. NOTNEWS and all that; there is hardly any in-depth coverage. &#x222F; WBG converse 06:42, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Interesting. Lets consider each point which WBG has mentioned. Lets leave the word lunatic because we cannot expect better language from him, but I am curious to know how he terms Dr. Dixit as right wing. Also was the charlatan word was for WBG himself? I agree with that then. Thank you. Happy editing. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 06:58, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Right wing from this source which mentions Dr Dixit has also been appointed as BJP’s brand ambassador for anti-obesity and diabetes reversal....the Dixit diet plan was originally conceived by the late Dr Shrikant Jichkar, who was also a politician.
 * Lunatic charlatan from Jimbo's famous reply, the context of which may be read over here. Also, the above-linked source states Experts from Indian Medical Association (IMA) pointed out that Dr Dixit is neither a dietician nor a diabetologist and hence his claims need to be put to scientific test before they can be accepted......Dr Dixit is not a diabetologist neither he is a dietician. Hence he cannot promote this diet.....There has to be a proper study that backs his claim...... Another source states The claims of Dr. Dixit that amount of insulin released in response to meals has no relation with the quality and quantity of meals is factually incorrect, and is in stark contrast to the physiological facts established via numerous published studies.....Dr. Dixit’s viral claim is not only misinformed but is potentially harmful for the pre-diabetic and type-2 diabetes patients....
 * Describing me to be a charlatan is very close to violating one of our pillars and I advice you to be cautious enough., &#x222F; WBG converse 07:38, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP:IDONTLIKEIT and WP:JIMBOSAID aside, this topic does appear to pass WP:GNG just by going from the English language sources in the article. Probably a lot more in the Indian languages sources.  Even if a person is a quack/charlatan/fraud, that doesn't mean they can't be notable. (Cough. Cough.)  Oakshade (talk) 01:44, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Article passes WP:GNG and as Oakshade said, WP:IDONTLIKEIT isn't a reason to delete a page. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:44, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep -- On re-thoughts, this will be a nice re-rendition of BGR-34 :-) I still believe that it's in NOTNEWS territory, every-time somebody claims such bunkum stuff, the media flocks but on retrospection, the benefit of having the article to aware readers of the dubiousness exceeds the downsides. &#x222F; WBG converse 14:36, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as self-advertisement. That's a sufficient reason for deletion regardless of notability.  DGG ( talk ) 18:29, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't find this Deletion request valid. The person is notable and I don't see any self-advertisment as commented by DGG as Jagannath and the article creator/editor Abhijeet Safai are two different one. Secondly this request looks as a rivalry request by the Nominator as this is something which is not new, the Whole Marathi Wikipedia is full by similar Vandalism and the user has been even blocked in the past for similar vandalism there. I advise the current stub article to be kept as per comments of User:Oakshade and must be properly improved in a neutral way and we hope to find new sources in near future. Thanking you. -- ✝iѵ ɛɳ  २२४० †ลℓк †๏ мэ 07:02, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * , ohhh I was just waiting for you, as you have been stalking my contributions, you would come and comment here too. I want to remind you that, you have been suggested to not stalk and follow my contributions, please stop making false alligations and personal attacks on me. here talk about content, provide refs and be civil if you could.  QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 07:44, 30 March 2019 (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.