Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nandini Jolly


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 06:05, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Nandini Jolly

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. Outside of the promotional tone, I could not locate any significant, in-depth coverage of subject to establish notability. The closest I found was this from The Globe and Mail which reads more like a testimonial about the company. CNMall41 (talk) 02:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

I found another in depth recent article a journalist did on Nandini. Do you suggest adding in the Globe and Mail one to the wiki page too? Link Therobmilne (talk) 02:29, 28 February 2017 (EST)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 07:04, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 07:04, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:48, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 04:33, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Noticed single-purpose account Special:Contributions/Therobmilne also created a badly styled article promoting her company's file format: Trusted Encrypted File (TEF) which is also up for deletion. I would say the person has a slightly better argument for notability, but this is clearly a vanity piece. W Nowicki (talk) 23:40, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947  08:49, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nomination. Fails WP:BIO. 1 article in the G&M is not significant coverage, nor establishes any enduring legacy or impact. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:19, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. In fairness to the article's creator, I do think that the newly-added CPA Canada article strengthens the "keep" argument a little bit, but not enough.  Essentially all we have here is a businessperson who started a company.  I'm not seeing any claim to significance that goes beyond that.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:14, 15 March 2017 (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.