Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaliprasadh


 * 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.  Sandstein  13:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Kaliprasadh

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

Not notable and sources are not reliable ~AntanO4task (talk) 19:26, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. ~AntanO4task (talk) 19:26, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:55, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Evidence in support of Notability:


 * Kaliprasadh is a published Tamil author, his books are published by Yaavarum Publishers and Natrinai who have hundreds of titles. Prior to that, his work has been published in leading online Journals (Vallinam, Solvanam). The publisher held critical review discussions in Chennai in December 2021, where notable authors like Akaramuthalvan attended and presented on Kaliprasadh's works. Kaliprasadh is one of the invitee guests of honor at Vishnupuram Vizha 2021 which is being attended by former Indian Union minister Jairam Ramesh


 * Evidence in support of Sources: The sources provided in the Wikipedia article include Ananda Vikatan.com (which is a well-known magazine in Tamil with 100-year history), Dinamani (Tamil's leading newspaper). Other sources include websites of authors Jeyamohan and S Ramakrishnan who are themselves highly notable as leading authors in Tamil literary sphere.


 * One of the Wikipedia admins has deleted external link YouTube videos which are direct evidences of a critical review about literary work. They have done so without even considering if the link was Relevant, Unique resource as per Wikipedia guidelines. This is a highly suspect circular logic in applying Wikipedia rules and guidelines

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Madhusam (talk • contribs) 06:42, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It is obvious that the AfD has been placed without even a basic awareness of what is notable or not in Tamil literary sphere. I submit that the AfD be removed

___________

Wikipedia's policies.. under WP:CREATIVE

1) The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors:

a) Sahitya Akademi Award winner S Ramakrishnan on Kaliprasad

b) Sahitya Akademi award winner Nanjil Nadan has written introduction to Kaliprasad's collection of stories. more link

c) interviews in media covering tamil literature - here and here

d) he was one of the guest speakers in the Kumaraguruparan Award 2018

While this alone is enough to establish notability, lets look at one more policy requirement under WP:CREATIVE

2) The person's work (or works) has: won significant critical attention

a) [Sahitya Academy Winner S Ramakrishnan selected Kali Prasad's work among the best works of 2019.

b) Review in Vikatan, leading tamil weekly

c) Reiew in The Hindu (Tamil)

d) Review in Dinamani]

e) Review in Kalaignar News

f) Review in Solvanam

g) Review in Vallinam, Malaysia based tamil magazine

Given that the author has well met two of the criterias and not just one for notability, I submit the page may be restored.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Santhoshsum1spcl (talk • contribs)

Comment - Simply the article is failed to cover WP:BIO, specially WP:BLP, WP:ANYBIO --~AntanO4task (talk) 19:19, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

While I have submitted specific clauses in policy you can’t respond with blanket link to a policy… specify which aspects of those are not covered by the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santhoshsum1spcl (talk • contribs) 02:17, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Simply read WP:ANYBIO which is just 3 lines.--~AntanO4task (talk) 18:43, 27 December 2021 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:47, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: This appears a trial to promote an author who doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NAUTHOR yet. ─  The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  17:42, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG and WP:NAUTHOR.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:23, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 13:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Wobbly Keep. I don't like to vote when I can't read the sources, but I feel the need to write this as a keep to counterbalance the Delete arguments, which I find insufficient, since they are just stating a guideline without explaining how this article doesn't meet it. My understanding of WP:NAUTHOR is as follows: despite the fact that this is not explicitly stated at WP:NAUTHOR, articles on authors routinely survive AfD when they have multiple (that is, two) published books with multiple (that is, two or more) reliable-source reviews. This person has two books, both with three published reviews. As I see it there are therefore only two possible deletion arguments here: 1) that three or more of these are not reputable reviews; 2) that a literary translation with solid reviews does not count for notability, and that the additional evidence here, such as being a special guest at an awards ceremony at which your work is a topic of discussion, does not bump a borderline case over the notability line. Neither of those arguments have yet been made. If someone can make them compellingly, I'll change my vote. -- asilvering (talk) 02:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per asilvering. oncamera   (talk page)  16:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - Intro para says R. Kaliprasadh (born 1979) is a Tamil writer. He has written short stories, translations, and literary reviews and criticism. This is not notable. "Literary Work" says he contributed to magazine, etc. Most people do such contribution. He or his work not won considerable awards. He is just an author and not per WP:AUTHOR. If the aricle is written as per [[WP:AUTHOR]], let me know which part and does it fit with reliable source? --~AntanO4task (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I have already answered this question, and (clearly, I believe) explained the two possible deletion arguments. The lead sentence is not obligated to explain why the subject of an article passes notability guidelines. (For comparison, take this unquestionably notable author: "AUTHOR was a British writer and lay theologian. He held academic positions in English literature at both Oxford University (Magdalen College, 1925–1954) and Cambridge University (Magdalene College, 1954–1963)." None of those things are inherently notable either.) -- asilvering (talk) 17:31, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep. I'm reluctant to delete an article about an author in a major literary tradition, when that author  has apparently published many books, just because I am totally unfamilar with the tradition. It's possible that the references are good, and we accept references in any language. There is no rule that the article must say X is notable because ____ . Such an argument was occasionally used in my first days here, but that was when we were still floundering around with the meaning of notability and the criteria for deletion; I haven't seen it since 2006 or 2007. I and many others thought it absurd then, and very soon so did everyone.   DGG ( talk ) 05:07, 19 January 2022 (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.