Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of IIT JEE Toppers (2nd nomination)


 * 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. No rough consensus was reached here. There is independent coverage of the winners; but no real agreement as to how to weigh it. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  19:26, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

List of IIT JEE Toppers
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

I think that in its current form, the article does not fulfill the guidelines of notability usually used on Wikipedia. I would recommend either deleting the article completely, or only keeping a list of people on the list who are notable themselves: such as, perhaps, those that already have a Wikipedia entry. Piyush (talk) 01:17, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I would also like to point out that the subject of IIT Toppers by no means gets "heavy" media attention; as was claimed by a voter in the last deletion request.  Most of the coverage is of the incidental type, which goes somewhat like "Here are the results of this gargantuan exam.  Here is the person who topped it.  Wow, she happens to be from our city.  Let's find out what her future plans are." (Sorry for sounding sarcastic, but that's the way it happens).  These articles come out once per year, and though they sometimes make it to the headlines on the websites of some national newspapers (usually the Times of India) the coverage in print editions, is rater more sedate. Piyush (talk) 01:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, I really can't see any significance to this list. The institute itself is of course notable, but a list of people who took an exam there is useless trivia. Of the 34 people listed, only 4 have articles about them. J I P  &#124; Talk 06:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * After going though the General Notability Guidelines, I think this list qualifies most of the requirements to warrant a case against deletion. Its relevance can, in some respect, be likened to the relevance of List of Rhodes Scholars or List of International Mathematical Olympiad participants, albeit they have many more notable people among them, i.e. people with Wikipedia articles on them. Keeping that in mind, though I think this list has some nominal archival value, I agree with Piyush that most information contained therein as of now is crud. I vote for condensing (deleting and renaming?) the list and, in the process, adding Wikipedia pages for more people mentioned therein.  musically_ut (talk) 21:45, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 08:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 08:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:27, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 14:45, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Reluctant keep. The Indians and their media appear to put great stock in this achievement. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:21, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  00:16, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep per Clarityfiend. --Legis (talk - contribs) 04:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * delete There's no indication of this examination having any significance outside a very narrow world around IIT. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:15, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - This is a significant academic achievement with extensive independent coverage. OPEN goes so far as to say that it is "probably the toughest entrance exam in the world", and as far as I can see, there's very detailed news coverage of individual recipients as they're named. —  C M B J   12:07, 16 December 2011 (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.