Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R. P. Patnaik


 * 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 keep per nominator's own withdrawal.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 10:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * IE: "Request speedy close as keep, as nominator. Article is no unsourced BLP any more."    The Banner  talk 09:33, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

R. P. Patnaik

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

unsourced BLP The Banner talk 21:43, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:43, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:43, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:44, 10 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:GNG and WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE... and fix per numerous available sources found through an easy and brief search. The article certainly has assertions of notability, and a point of fact is that earlier versions DID have sources, unfortunately removed by an anon IP in newbie efforts last year to expand the article. Some have now been returned. Let's fix this up and not delete a demonstrably notable topic that simply needs editorial attention.  SCHMIDT,  Michael Q. 03:33, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notable personality, popular also. Enough references from reliable sources available. Award winning personality. Article has good scope for improvement also. Anish Viswa  04:32, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong keep – A prominent composer in Telugu cinema. Has won the "Filmfare Best Music director" for three consecutive years. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  06:09, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The article was created in November 2006 and as noted above did contain sources at one time. I think the nominator was concerned about WP:BLP in that the version he nominated was without sources (now corrected). However, in considering the number of decent sources available though a search, notability is without doubt and the thing could even be brought to GA status with a little attention. I would politely point out that even though it often results in improvements, AFD is not intended to be used to force cleanup.  SCHMIDT,  Michael Q. 08:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It is nice to see how the article is improved, as I had the idea that it was another case of puffery and selfpromo, impossible to rescue. That it turns out otherwise is a pleasant surprise. Rescuing, not to mention cleaning up, was in my opinion not possible, so don't accuse me of forcing a clean up. Assume good faith, please. The Banner talk 09:33, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for revisting, and I am happy that that a rescue was a pleasant surprise. I do assume good faith as WP:BEFORE is only a suggestion and not a pre-nomination mandate. Please do not take my pointing to WP:NOTCLEANUP as a personal affront, as I have extensive experience dealing with improvable articles sent to AFD that simply needed a little love.  SCHMIDT,  Michael Q. 10:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Request speedy close as keep, as nominator. Article is no unsourced BLP any more. The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 09:33, 13 August 2013 (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.