Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K. N. Srivastava


 * 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) Natg 19 (talk) 07:13, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

K. N. Srivastava

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not seem notable enough to warrant a Wiki page. Kautilya3 (talk) 21:12, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:40, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:40, 10 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep -It actually does seem notable for inclusion. Please take a look at now-version of the article with a number of sources. When you nominate an article for deletion, please perform WP:BEFORE and in particular India related articles, please see WP:INDAFD too. Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  15:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Right, so many newspapers and media have individually printed his activities. Bladesmulti (talk) 16:03, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking. I did find most of these sources as part of my WP:BEFORE, but didn't find any material wiki-worthy. If you are interested in developing it into a proper article, please give it a go. But I would be surprised if anything noteworthy crops up. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:36, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Please do not get offended, I only meant to say in case you didn't take a look at in particular WP:INDAFD that helped me to find a number of sources and convince that the subject perhaps meet WP:GNG standard. And Wikipedia is a Work in Progress, it does take time for an article to be developed from stub to start, C, B, Good and Featured article and actually these stuffs are irrelevant to Deletion process (where we only check if the subject meets the inclusion criteria or not). We may discuss the scope of improvements on the article's talk page. :) Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  12:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * To meet WP:GNG, you need to be able to answer the question, what is this person notable for? Mere mention in news sources is not enough. People that hold important posts make decisions that affect a lot of people. So, they are bound to get mentioned in the media. But that is not notability of the person, just the notability of the post. Kautilya3 (talk) 23:03, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * OK. GNG is defined as "significant coverage in multiple secondary, independent and reliable sources", and here is the sources you may want to take a look at, Zee News, Livemint, Tehelka, The Hindu, The Hindu, Firstpost. Don't you think, if he has received this much coverage in the Indian mainstream daily English newspapers, he is likely to receive or have been received some in Hindi and Kannada language sources? For a person to be notable, the required criteria is 'sources must exist' not that they are all 'available right about now'. However, we are not totally deprived of sources about them. If it still doesn't answer your query, I'm sorry. I'll wait for other editors comment. Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  05:36, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Weak Keep As director general of the Archaeological Survey of India, and taking all minor coverage together he seems notable. The quality of the article is not considered in AfD process (ruling out plagiarism/promotion/etc). --AmritasyaPutra T 03:42, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:48, 17 January 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Head of a national government agency seems like a notable posting, and additional evidence of notability is given in the existence of an article in The Hindu about him at his previous posting. Well sourced for its length. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:01, 25 January 2015 (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.