Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kavita Devi (journalist)


 * 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. Geschichte (talk) 07:13, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Kavita Devi (journalist)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

non-notable journalist, fails WP:GNG. Sources are WP:ROUTINE and trivial mention. Priyanjali singh (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Priyanjali singh (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Priyanjali singh (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Priyanjali singh (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Priyanjali singh (talk) 15:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Oaktree b (talk) 16:00, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - multiple sources exist, proving notability.   KyloRen3 (talk) 19:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment, I'm the creator of the page so I'll refrain from a !vote. But please hear me out and bear with me as this might get long. I created the article as part of the Women in Red project in an effort to counter the systemic bias of under-representation of certain demographics. In this case the subject is a journalist who is both a woman and a Dalit ("untouchable"); likely the most notable Dalit woman journalist to begin with. Regarding establishing notability itself, my argument and reasoning was the following:
 * WP:JOURNALIST outlines additional criteria through which notability can be established, three of them state that "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors", that "[t]he person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique", and that "[t]he person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work."
 * Kavita Devi is the co-founder and editor-in-chief of Khabar Lahariya, which is considered a pioneer in the field of rural journalism in India. She has been frequently conferred with and cited to by the more mainstream media,    and even has her life partially documented over multiple pages in a book on women's lives in India.  This is certainly more coverage than any typical journalist would receive and in favor of meeting the aforementioned criteria. The founders of Khabar Lahariya have also collectively won the UNESCO King Sejong Literacy Prize and the Chameli Devi Jain Award for Outstanding Women Mediapersons. This should make her partially complaint to fulfill the criteria under WP:ANYBIO as well.


 * On the other hand, WP:GNG states that "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. The article in question here has sources where the main topic is Kavita Devi, this is explicitly non trivial coverage. In addition, WP:BASIC even states that "[i]f the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability." This is demonstrated by the sources in the article as well.
 * Moreover, how does WP:ROUTINE even apply here? It's a section under notability guideline for events and not of people (see ). Tayi Arajakate  Talk 20:04, 25 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  19:30, 26 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep, easily passes WP:GNG, nominator using reference to WP:ROUTINE erroneously. In addition to in-dept coverage in outlets like Hindustan Times and Times of India linked above, note --Soman (talk) 22:22, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the justification given by the creator of the article. -Hatchens (talk) 15:35, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep passes general notability guidelines. Missvain (talk) 18:06, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 14:14, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - plenty of coverage, and a historic first. Bearian (talk) 23:04, 1 December 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.