Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mangesh V. Nadkarni


 * 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. Big Dom  14:48, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Mangesh V. Nadkarni

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Establish the notability or remove it, if the material does not support notability, add more 0ukieu (talk) 13:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:35, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:35, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. Article is about a professor of English and authority on Sri Aurobindo. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. It is customary for deletion nominators to explain the reasons why they don't consider subjects to be notable rather than bark out orders to other editors. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:46, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The nominator has edited the nomination statement, thus removing the context in which my previous comment was made. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

? Is Nadkrni notable because he was in academia or he followed Aurobindo? Note that Konkani language without a script is spoken by a very few people. I wonder his work on Konkni language alone makes him notable! Does he really 100% wiki notable or 50% or less? Is his work enough? He is no more and we wouldnot be expecting additional work from him. The number of citations you presented is pretty low for this type of work. The quantity of books is not the factor, it should be the quality. I do not agree with you, but it is your decision. 0ukieu (talk) 12:07, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - I have reversed as it it is not the correct way. Thanks. 0ukieu (talk) 23:33, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 *  Comment '. First of all this is not a hot-headed discussion. When a page remains as a not notable for a long time, there might be some problems with the page itself or the way how it is being administered. Whatever the case it may be, it is time to study the notability and keep/delete the page as appropriately. I have expressed my feelings on thia page. Someone might have written this page without realizing what could end up to such pages. Nadkarni was a professor of English in India and Sr. Lecturer in Singapore University. His work in english literaure does not make him notable. We need to evaluate his notability in his area. He might had spent time studying Aurobindo Philosopy for his life style. Yet, that may not be enough to be considered for notability. Let us have a fresh look on this page and keep it as necessary by removing flag "he is not notable". Thanks.0ukieu (talk) 22:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment' We need to evaluate - During the course of his professorship, he guided Ph.D. candidates and published his research in theoretical and applied Linguistics in national and international journals. The rest of the materials have no value on his page. 0ukieu (talk) 23:41, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Unless it is a different academic entirely, the automated Google Books and Scholar searches appear to reveal some fairly widely cited papers on the structure of Dravidian languages.  He has also written a book about Sri Aurobindo.  He would appear to meet the notability guideline for academics. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 04:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Can you be specific to write the criteria # used 1 to 9 for academics? Can you give here the numbers for his widely cited papers? I have not seen them. Have you evaluated his book on Sri Aurobindo? Is that considered as a scholarly work or has it the book made any impact on society? Note that his last position at the National University of Singapore was Sr. lecturer of english. In India, he was with the Central Institute of English. (Not an University). In India alone, there are more than 6000 colleges, institutes and universities and  he is was one of them he might be the better ones working for such institutes worked in India. We have to be very careful to call many of these as notable in their fields. . Why did wikipedia set  - "he is not notable" for all these years ? There is something wrong here and we need to discuss it. I suggest you to read  Peter Heehs who also wrote books on Aurobindo. His page is clean.  It may not be advisable to keep pages to please someone with the label "he/she is not notable". Remove such pages and move on. Thanks. 0ukieu (talk) 13:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep There's an easy way for you to have answered your own questions--follow the link above in the AfD heading to Google Scholar. His article "Bilingualism and syntactic change in Konkani" published in - Language, 1975 - (a major journal included in JSTOR) has 86 citations. There are some other articles also. Four of his books are in WorldCat. Now, all this is relatively minimal, but many of the works will be of interest primarily in India, and worldcat does not include Indian libraries (and there is no source that does). I would ordinarily not say keep for this, except he explicitly meets criterion 2  of WP:PROF, for he received the tribute of a festschrift or commemorative volume, Paranjpe, P. N., and Mangesh Vithal Nadkarni. Explorations in Applied Linguistics:  Prof. M. V. Nadkarni Felicitation Volume. Pune: Shubhada-Saraswat Prakashan, 1995. ISBN 9788186411070, which is not just a work of parochial interest, as it is found in 30 worldcat libraries, including most of the most important US libraries and several European ones also.     DGG ( talk ) 04:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per DGG, a felicitation volume is proof of academic notability in India.--Sodabottle (talk) 11:13, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment why was it set on his page that Nadkarni is not notable
 * comment which Paranjpe are you talking about? Does wikipedia recognize him as a notable? Why was Nadkarni felicitated? Have you read the volumes? WP:PROF #2 reads like this - 2.The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.  What highly prestigious was awarded to him? Anyone can filicitate anyone in India or elsewhere and there are many such types of felicitations. I'm afraid to say that  you are breaking the WP:PROF rules. He was felicitated at a local level - not at national level.  Shubhada Saraswat Prakashan was a Konkani people publication- Nadkarni was a Konkani(Saraswat).  Who felicitated were his people0ukieu (talk) 23:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)0ukieu (talk) 01:48, 18 March 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.