Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karan Tanna


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 05:23, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Karan Tanna

 * – ( View AfD View log )

pomotional, and non-notable. See talk page, and      DGG ( talk ) 04:55, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails GNG and I am not sure what subjective criteria this article could pass. A clear-cut promotional piece as the nominator says. ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  06:53, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete As per nomination. MrsSnoozyTurtle 12:06, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Zero indication of notability. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 13:17, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak delete I developed a source assessment table based on the sources in the article, and my search for sources has not found additional support, so it appears WP:TOOSOON for WP:BASIC notability. Beccaynr (talk) 15:52, 4 November 2021 (UTC) - update !vote per comment below - update !vote again per comment below Beccaynr (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment An earlier version of this article also includes Entrepreneur Reveals its 35 Under 35 Class of 2019, (Entrepreneur India Magazine, 2019, one sentence, after a header describing him as "The Relentless Restaurateur"), Can cloud kitchens rescue restaurants? (The Indian Express, 2020, includes quotes of his opinion, independent reporting on his career, and context), New restrictions may plunge food delivery platforms back into peril (Economic Times, 2021, includes quotes of his opinion, with context). I have struck my !vote above due to this additional partial support for WP:BASIC notability, and am currently neutral. Beccaynr (talk) 18:03, 4 November 2021 (UTC) - updated !vote per comment below Beccaynr (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:42, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:42, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:42, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete There is no notability, only promotionalism . This applies to the additional references also. Anything to do with "35 under 35" or or "30 under 30" or "top 50 young Indians"  or  similar "honours" is a promotional gimmicks. Forbes indulges in many such lists, and the article from there in the table above is a purely promotional  article  based on what he chose to tell them--looking at it again, I think it's not even reliable enough to be called promotional  -- it reads as straightforward advertising.  A description as "the relentless restauranteur" is evidence of purely promotional writing.    Being quoted in a general article on the field is not notability. Magazines devoted to showcasing the career of entrepreneurs  are vehicles for PR agents. "Containing biographical and career information" is usually a reprint of the PR agent's press release.  My own rule in cases like this is when there is no evidence of substantial accomplishments such as would generate a genuine news story, anything published is likely to be unreliable. Some of our guidelines for sourcing assumes publishers publish only what is worth publishing. We were remarkably naïve  when we drew them up 20 years ago.   DGG ( talk ) 22:25, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment, I feel your comment helps articulate some of the issues I have with asserting a keep rationale. There are a few sources that I think indicate notability may exist in the future, and the GQ/Forbes/Entrepreneur lists are a form of attention, but without solid WP:SECONDARY sources about substantial accomplishments, this article appears to become an extension of marketing efforts, which seems like a particular risk for articles about business owners. I have updated my !vote accordingly. Beccaynr (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment, I feel your comment helps articulate some of the issues I have with asserting a keep rationale. There are a few sources that I think indicate notability may exist in the future, and the GQ/Forbes/Entrepreneur lists are a form of attention, but without solid WP:SECONDARY sources about substantial accomplishments, this article appears to become an extension of marketing efforts, which seems like a particular risk for articles about business owners. I have updated my !vote accordingly. Beccaynr (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete: I have spent some time studying this. The source analysis table is illuminating. PR that is "almost but not quite good enough" is my verdict. I noted on Commons that the image licence appears inappropriate. That made my antenna twitch, too, and I flagged it there. There is no notability shown. He may be a decent chef doing a good job but he fails WP:BIO. This is fancruftisement. Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 23:26, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per DGG's explanation. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 00:14, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete – I looked at this when it was a draft, and I was not able to see any notability. DGG's assessment is spot on. --bonadea contributions talk 12:45, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Clearly doesn't meet any notability guideline.Brayan ocaner (talk) 23:37, 9 November 2021 (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.