Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nihal Mehta


 * 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. MER-C 03:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Nihal Mehta

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable executive. The refs are the usual pr and notices, and none of them give substantial coverage. Not would one expect it, as the accomplishments are minor and the awards about ass minor as they come.  DGG ( talk ) 03:21, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

 References  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment – Below are a couple of sources that provide significant coverage about the subject (the first two). The sources from AdAge and TechCrunch also provide some background information. North America1000 12:29, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  18:34, 22 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:PROMO with a dose of WP:TNT. Sample copy:
 * "With over 15 years experience in marketing technologies through founding five startups and investing in 100+ since 1999, Nihal Mehta is a noted expert..." Etc.
 * Strictly a marketing brochure for this unremarkable executive. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:34, 24 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete I am unconvinced he passes notability muster on the evidence, even given the sources Northamerica1000 found - David Gerard (talk) 16:45, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete and Salt (given the past G11 speedy, which ultimately saw the article simply restarted now, therefore showing the sheer blatancy) as the nomination is exact with how this is entirely PR advertising and it's something we are quite familiar with, therefore that also means we make no compromises with advertising. SwisterTwister   talk  23:27, 24 October 2016 (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.