Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikhil Gupta


 * 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 Speedy delete under G11, unambiguous advertising or promotion by User:Fluffernutter. (non-admin closure) Quasi  human  &#124;  Talk  21:05, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Nikhil Gupta

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Apparently non-notable, promotional BLP. Astrology forums on facebook which aren't even about this astrologer are not a good basis for an article. bobrayner (talk) 10:45, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 10:59, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete I checked the two non-Facebook "references" and there was nothing about this person there. Copy is all promotional.  North8000 (talk) 11:44, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 14:56, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Borderline speedyable; no reliable sources to support notability. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails WP:BIO. Very close to being alright to speedy delete. Joe Chill (talk) 21:16, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete: I've tagged it up for WP:SPEEDY. The article was probably created by the subject himself (User:Nikhil.mba.gupta). The person is truly non-notable. Of the references/external links supplied in the article, only two of them pass WP:RS ( and ) - and none of them have any reference to the subject. All the others are from his own website, an obscure blog about Astrology, Facebook comments, and various posts from astrology forums (all are either WP:SPS or WP:USERG). Absolutely no coverage in popular Indian media. Vote for speedy deletion under criterion WP:A7 &mdash;  Fιηεmαηη  (talk) 20:45, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: My personal thinking was that claims like "known for his worldwide popularity" might disqualify the article from A7. Those sentences might not be true - that's why we're discussing deletion - but notability is at least claimed. Whatever; as long as te article goes, I'm happy. bobrayner (talk) 08:50, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: The subject has already posted the Wikipedia link on his website (http://www.nikhilworld.com/myself.html), saying that it gives his full profile. I guess it is very okay now to assume that User:Nikhil.mba.gupta is the subject himself, and he created this article just for promotional purposes. &mdash;  Fιηεmαηη  (talk) 21:00, 25 August 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.