Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R. Raj Rao


 * 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   keep. Tone 20:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

R. Raj Rao

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The author is not notable per WP:AUTHOR. The only award he has received is a newly created award which I could find nothing about on the Internet other than on pages about the author himself. The article claims he is a "leading" gay rights activist in India, but the source makes no such claim. It is my view that the subject fails the qualifications of WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR Inks.LWC (talk) 08:39, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. "Keep" added by Drmies--that's how I read this contribution. The nominator needs some reworking on his definitions. Googling 'Quebec-India Awards' brings this link,  at the very first page. As anyone can infer, this is an academic program, and one of the references in the wiki page, , was infact an article on him and the other candidate who was selected for the award that year. And on his definitions of 'leading', kindly check the reference for that. With the amount of gay activism that is on in India, for an individual who has started a coursework on Queer studies in a very conservative Pune University and his contributions to the queer scene, that reference was lauding the same, and rightly so. The nominator is nothing less than a vandal in raising such false alarms without proper verification, leave aside the intention to improve the article, which should be his purpose! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manorathan (talk • contribs) 09:13, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. "Keep" added by Drmies--that's how I read this contribution. He is indeed a leading gay rights activist. If you want some other source also quoting the same please visit penguins author profile! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tunafish9 (talk • contribs) 12:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  —Manorathan (talk) 18:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  —Manorathan (talk) 18:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —Manorathan (talk) 18:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  —Manorathan (talk) 18:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Not a notable figure enough to be kept in wiki.The award isn't an acclaimed award and there are thousands of authors in penguin.A publisher uploads profile given by it's authors.--117.211.84.226 (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per recent expansion. Article really needs a lot of cleanup, but the writer is clearly notable. I urge the nominator and the IP to look at it again and perhaps allow the nomination to be withdrawn. Note to article creator: perhaps the nominator got it wrong, but please assume good faith. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Author clearly notable in India, therefore article is notable. HairyWombat 15:05, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notable now that its sources have been upgraded. There are certainly "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" if you bother to look around. There's enough material to expand the entry, including his own characterization of himself as not an activist these days but more an engaged writer. Bmclaughlin9 (talk)
 * Keep and props to those who practiced diligent WP:BEFORE. Being sourcably notable in India is perfectly fine with en.Wikipeda.  Article will benefit from additional cleanup, but notable topics rarely merit deletion because they simply need a little attention.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inks.LWC (talk • contribs) 21:03, May 16, 2011
 * 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.