Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radhika Roy


 * 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. apparent consensus after relisting  DGG ( talk ) 06:02, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Radhika Roy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PRODed as "Non-notable businesswoman/journalist, wife of a notable businessman and probably just a rubber-stamp co-founder and co-chairman of her husband's company. Fails WP:GNG." Later dePRODed by "Expanding article" and adding refs to unsourced statements, which still do not show her to be notable enough than being wife of a founder and maybe thus a co-founder. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:05, 19 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Well maybe she is co-founder and co-chairman merely because she "rubber stamps" her husband's work. This, however, suggests it might be the other way round and that her husband's position is actually due to her. Her husband says "she is the guiding vision and force behind NDTV." but maybe he is just being self-deprecating. Anyway, reliable sources are present. Thincat (talk) 09:36, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That piece is what a hagiography is. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:01, 19 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Quite a few reliable sources seem to suggest she is not a rubber stamp but an active businesswoman  e.g., , . Clearly passes WP:GNG  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChunnuBhai (talk • contribs) 08:42, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:16, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Rediff piece, hagiography as stated above. Cravan doesn't really tell you if she is rubber-stamp or not either but just that she hold shares in so and so companies. Business Standard says "Sebi initiates action against NDTV, Prannoy Roy, Radhika Roy, RRPR Holdings". She finds mention in the headline and once in the article; which is just the starting line that elaborated the headline. This actually is in her merely being of a (rubber-stamp) head and nothing else. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:02, 27 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The only suggestion that she is a "rubber stamp" comes from the delete nominator, not from any sources. The sources -- including Bloomberg business -- confirm a 10 year career in print and more than 25 years in television, and that she co-founded and manages a company. I agree that the lead wasn't strong and much of the information was in the sources and not on the page -- so I've improved the page. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 21:25, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep NDTV seems to be a major mainstream media in India. As the founder of a notable media company, I think the subject is notable. Yes, the article has a bunch of non-noteworthy information which needs to be trimmed. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Additionally, this suggests that she was the actual founder of the company while and she offered a job to her husband to work there. Not sure what is the exact situation, but I think it is fair to have a standalone article. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:26, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Pinging to have a look and see if the source is reliable. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:27, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:28, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:28, 4 February 2017 (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.