Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rahul Singh (author)


 * 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. ✗ plicit  12:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Rahul Singh (author)

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

Promotional content. Potentially failing WP:BIO. Many of the sources do not denote the notability of subject.

Also to note that this article has gone through the entire WP:DRAFTIFY process, with the article being moved to draftspace, and reverted by the author, and that the author had reverted draftification process twice on another article they had created, indicative that subsequent draftification here may be moot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertsky (talk • contribs) 08:25, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

There are 18 sources; 7 sources are REFBOMB, trying to support the assertion that he lead a fundraiser. But from the sources, it seems that the fundraiser is a joint effort that's spread across multiple universities' alumni networks.

Notability as a guest lecturer is questionable as anyone can be invited as a guest lecturer as long the topic matches the subject matter a person is an expert/more experienced in.

There are three books listed in the bibliography, but it might as well be just two books, as Engineering to Ikigai and  You know the glory, Not the story are the same book with different titles (as reveal in a source). There are a review for each book, which I don't think qualifies for notability under WP:AUTHOR: such work must have been the primary subject [sic] of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.

– robertsky (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:17, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete agree with above analysis. Oaktree b (talk) 18:48, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with the above source analysis, except: iimnagpur does not provide significant coverage (hence doesn't contribute to GNG); current consensus on Economic Times is between generally unreliable and no consensus, per WP:TOI; the Hindustan Times piece also does not help with sigcov since it's doesn't even namecheck the subject; the NTU alumni story cannot be considered independent nor reliable from the subject (inherent interest in promoting alumni stories in a positive light), nor does it cover the subject in significant detail. The SMU alumni source shares this similar issue. The two book reviews do not cover the subject of the article in detail. My personal tally has all sources failing to contribute to the GNG, so this clearly fails WP:NBIO. I also don't think there have been multiple independent periodical articles or reviews of his work per WP:AUTHOR, because two is the bare minimum and I like to think we have higher standards, and also given that the author credited for both pictures in the book reviews is the subject of the article (it raises concerns about the independence of the pieces, due to the article's subject being given some choice over which picture to display for his "review" articles). Pilaz (talk) 08:33, 9 February 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.