Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jagpreet Singh (headmaster)


 * 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. The comments about GNG failure are persuasive, and even other comments admit that most of the sources are passing mentions. Black Kite (talk) 18:38, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Jagpreet Singh (headmaster)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Headmaster of a boys school. free of scandal and controversy. No claim to fame academically. In short fails GNG MistyGraceWhite (talk) 10:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as creator, the headmaster of The Doon School is always a prominent figure in India's private school sector. Given the position's stature, only proven and significant educators of the country are appointed to it. BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 10:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * @User:BahrdozsBulafka notability is not inherited. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 10:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * In agreement there, it is earned...as the article's subject has. BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 10:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * @User:BahrdozsBulafka if he has earned it then WP:RS should have mentioned him in depth. They did not. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 10:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The mere fact that India's largest English newspaper considers it worth its while to report on the appointment of a school headmaster should give us some clues to its notability in India's education sector. BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 10:47, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * @User:BahrdozsBulafka This is a classic example of inherited notability. They are reporting the appointment, not the headmaster. They will report the appointment no matter who is appointed; even if an orangutan is appointed, they will report that because the school is notable. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 13:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I agree with you in principle, however given WP:Systemic bias, things, people, orgs. often slip through the cracks on Wikipedia. This article is notable in the same vein as, say, Donna Strickland, a Nobel laureate who did not even have a Wiki article before she won the prize. No, I'm not drawing a parallel to the Nobel laureate here, but just illustrating the point that, often, a person's notable work in an extremely narrow field could be given short shrift for a long time (on Wiki, not the real world), and noticed only when they arrive at a major post or win a big prize. That shouldn't mean the post or prize alone is notable, and the person who won it is simply riding on borrowed prestige. After all, there must be a reason they won it... BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 13:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * @User:BahrdozsBulafka Education, academia etc. Is not a narrow field. The existance of other stuff cannot be used as an argument or a rationale on wikipedia. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 13:49, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, and that is not my argument here at all. You seem to have misunderstood my point. The nuance is about the narrowness of, for example, chirped pulse amplification, for which Donna won her prize, and in our case, distinguished educators in Indian secondary education. Not that "education, academia" as a whole is a narrow field, that's not what I wrote...Regards BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 13:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:GNG, lacks significant coverage in reliable independent sources. XVDC (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - the article is part of a series and everyone that preceded it have articles of their own. like the other user said getting reported on in India's national newspaper says a lot about both the person and position.  sources aren't abundant but likely are in other languages and India has a lot of them.Grmike (talk) 05:38, 1 May 2020 (UTC)grmike
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:45, 2 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep and comment - apart from the Times of India citation mentioned above, found another 2014 report (currently not cited in the article) in the national newspaper The Hindu reporting on the subject winning a "prestigious" award in education, and other passing mentions in The Tribune and another Times of India story (again, both not in the article). The newspaper sources hint at his recognition in the space before his latest appointment (well, to the extent a country's educator, no matter how illustrious, can be given space in a national newspaper along with subjects of politics, war etc.). Considering that in tandem with the news of latest post at Doon School, generally seen as the top school in the country, appears to satisfy the notability criteria. I also notice he was at another major Indian school, Mayo College (est.1875), for more than 20 years, and later became its vice-principal...In any case, the citations mentioned above should be used to further add to, and improve, the article, and see if there are more reliable sources that you might have have missed... FaithCharity (talk) 17:29, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment, and those links. I've now added to the article..Best, BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 17:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:ACADEMIC. - FitIndia  Talk Commons 18:54, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 21:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable academic per WP:TEACHER and lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 06:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete since subject fails WP:TEACHER and even WP:GNG. The unacceptable argument about similar articles has made its typical appearance again. -The Gnome (talk) 18:14, 15 May 2020 (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.