Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Purshottam Lal


 * 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. The "keep" arguments consist only of assertions that a head of a very large police force is automatically notable, but this view has no basis in our notability guidelines. On the contrary, the community has some time ago deprecated WP:SOLDIER, which used to assume the notability of high-ranking military officers, which hold similar positions. The "delete" side's arguments that there are not enough secondary sources to write an article with remains uncontested.  Sandstein  12:32, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Purshottam Lal

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

A biography of a police officer, who was Director general of police in Punjab. That is the only claim to notability, and I don't think a Director general of police is automatically notable. The sources are overwhelmingly articles and opinions pieces written by him, together with a couple of press releases about his books. The only independent source is this review of one of his books – it is not more than a paragraph, however.

The tone of the article is so promotional that I was tempted to speedy tag it as spam. If the article should be kept after this AfD, it will have to be cut down and thoroughly rewritten. In addition, very little of the biographical information has a source (one wonders where the information in the "Early life and family" section comes from). bonadea contributions talk 15:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DMySon (talk) 06:16, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 15:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. bonadea contributions talk 15:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. The head of the police in an Indian state with a population of nearly 28 million is clearly significant enough for an article. Poor article, but enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. Being a poor article is not a criterion for deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm not so sure that being the head of police for a state of large population is a lock for a notability pass. For instance, after checking it's category there doesn't to be an article on a single commissioner of the California Highway Patrol. Some of these refs appear to be self-written and others as simple book listings. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:09, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This has been said before, but those who say it completely fail to understand that American policing works completely differently. The California Highway Patrol is merely one police agency among thousands in California. The Punjab Police, however, polices the whole Punjab. The Commissioner of the CHP is not the head of the police in California, but merely the head of one relatively small agency. The DGP of the Punjab is the head of the police in the Punjab. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:13, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Commenting as nominator: I don't know anything about USAnian police systems but I do know what the DNG is (I linked to the article in the nomination, to make sure that other participants in the discussion could check), and I definitely did not mean to imply that the article was nominated because it's in a poor state. I started by trying to clean the article up, and realised that I could not find anything to indicate notability, unless a Director General of Police in an Indian state is inherently notable. Looking at various SNGs I just couldn't find that – but I'm happy to be proven wrong. I disagree about the current sources meeting GNG. --bonadea contributions talk 09:05, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The article creator and main contributor has been blocked for sockpuppetry. --bonadea contributions talk 09:05, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete we just do not have the level of coverage to justify an article on him. Oddly enough, at least in the US, I am suspecting that city level police chiefs are more likely to be notable (well, as in more are notable, the percentage notable will be less, but that is because there are so many more cities), than state police chiefs. I am sure we could create multiple well sourced articles on the heads of police in New York City, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles and possibly a few other major cities, I think we would be much more hard pressed to create articles on heads of police for New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Michigan or California.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:20, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Again, as I pointed out above, state police forces in America are generally not especially large and the head of the state police is not head of all policing in the state, but only of their own force which only has limited jurisdiction. Most policing is handled by independent city or county police agencies. This is a fundamental difference between policing in the United States and most other countries (which mostly only have a single national force or sometimes only a single force in each state) which seems to confuse many American editors. This gentleman, on the other hand, directly commands all or almost all police in the entire state of Punjab, a force 80,000 strong (nearly twice the size of the NYPD, America's biggest police agency). That's an enormous difference. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * "His achievements found wide publicity in Indian media." - would you be able to provide further sources for that? I don't think the current citations in the article qualify as proof of "wide publicity", or really as proof of the achievements at all. The entire Awards/Achievement paragraph has no inline citations. ObsidianPotato (talk) 15:12, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I've struck the vote since you claim to be the creator whose block is a CU block for sock-puppetry. Please restore only if the block is lifted. Hemantha (talk) 09:28, 20 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment: I've been trying to independently confirm some of the information, e.g. the President’s Police Medal for Distinguished Service in 1993 (or 1994? - the article gives two different dates). Unfortunately, it's really hard - for instance I'm unable to access https://www.punjabpolice.gov.in/medal_dis_services.aspx which could provide us with a source.
 * I find @Necrothesp's arguments for keeping at the very least noteworthy but I'm struggling to see how to reach sufficient verifiability for this article. Pending further sources - perhaps there is information in Punjabi or some other language that I wouldn't be able to access.
 * I agree that the article in its current state has severe WP:NPOV and sourcing issues - but as said that isn't particularly relevant to the notability discussion. ObsidianPotato (talk) 23:25, 19 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for a detailed answer. I understand that internet sources might not exist, or might be difficult to find. However, foreign-language sources, subscription-locked sources, as well as paper sources including books and newspapers, are also acceptable (as long as they are published, verifiable and properly quoted).
 * I recommend you re-read WP:V, WP:RS, and look at derivative policy articles/essays for further advice (e.g. WP:NOTTRUTH). You can also use tools like the Wayback Machine to access internet sites that aren't available anymore. Unfortunately, as per the verifiability policy, this article needs citations, not assertions. ObsidianPotato (talk) 10:44, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * IPsock post struck.  please don't ask questions of blocked users in deletion discussions, as they are not allowed to make any edits to Wikipedia except to request that their block be lifted, which they must do on the talk page of their account, User talk:Sneha-SIPL. --bonadea contributions talk 20:07, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Bonadea thank you, I was not aware of that. I was working under the assumption that edits by blocked users should only be autodeleted/reverted if they are unjustified, misleading, and/or damaging Wikipedia. ObsidianPotato (talk) 23:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree with what Necrothesp said. The article is a bit of a mess as it stands, but that's a question of content, not of notability. Atchom (talk) 01:16, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete There's 10+ kb discussion but not a single WP:SIRS source has been identified. The only WP:RS links in the article are to Tribune; all of which are subject's own columns and are completely useless for this WP:BLP page. The only reliable book review, again Tribune, specifically says it's a "Tribune Short" and devotes a single paragraph. Hence WP:NAUTHOR is also not an avenue. I've tried a Punjabi search which hasn't given anything. If there aren't any sources, it's impossible to write an article. Hemantha (talk) 09:28, 20 April 2022 (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.