Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirtida Gautam


 * 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. Biblio worm  16:53, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Kirtida Gautam

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:AUTHOR. Though there are many references on the page, only a few blogs actually mention the person. The author has one recently written self-published book and nothing else and - by all appearances - is using Wikipedia for promotional purposes. regentspark (comment) 13:38, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. FuriouslySerene (talk) 15:58, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. FuriouslySerene (talk) 15:58, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment There are serious issues here regarding WP:COI and the use of multiple accounts for promotional purposes on related articles. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:29, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete for now at least as News and browser found a few links but certainly not enough. Pinging tagger and interested subject users, , ,  and .  SwisterTwister   talk  06:44, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete for now. There is an assertion of notability here via her writing for various TV shows, but I can't really find anything to show how involved she was in the process. There can be many, many writers on a team, some that take major roles while others do cleanup. Unfortunately it can be difficult to find information on people in India, especially if they're not mainstream. Other than a notification of an event, I can't really find anythign to show that she's ultimately notable enough for an article at this point in time. It also doesn't help that the article history was almost entirely written by a sockpuppet and was likely created by another. I have no true issue with this being recreated if WP:RS can be provided that back up the claims of notability, but this looks to be too soon for an entry. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  10:34, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete the person's not notable. And, the author has a conflict of interest issue.  //nepaxt  15:05, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. I am inclined to say that this is WP:TOOSOON and not notable at the moment. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  15:13, 3 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. -- Softlavender (talk) 15:54, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ignoring the sock puppetry and promotional edits, it seems too soon for an article right now.  Being featured in The New Indian Express is a good start, but it's not yet a strong enough claim to notability. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:31, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - per .  Ya  sh  !   04:51, 8 November 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.