Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajan Navani


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 15:39, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Rajan Navani

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't pass GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Reference padding from PR sources and I can't find anything from reliable sources to show significant coverage either. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  06:01, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  06:02, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  06:02, 25 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Medhajai's good faith article on Rajan Navani. There is no claim to notability made in the article. I found plenty of substantive coverage, but none of it in independent sources, all of them were from organizations to which he belongs. The independent sources, including those cited in the article, only mention him in passing, often only to quote his comment on a corporate personnel change. Fails WP:GNG for lack of significant coverage, namely lack of independent coverage. Fails WP:BIO for the same reason.  There may be minor copyright violations from the webpages about him at the Aspen Institute and the Code for India websites, which articles are essentially identical.  This article was created on 21 September 2015 by editor Medhajai, whose first contibution was a substantial article on India's new Foreign Secretary, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, on 3 September 2013. There do not appear to be any conflict of interest issues. It should be noted that the Jetline Group, which includes JetSynthesys, is a group of Navani family businesses and does not appear to be notable itself. --Bejnar (talk) 19:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:07, 28 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete for now as although News, Books, browser and Highbeam found links, there's nothing to suggest better improvement. SwisterTwister   talk  06:07, 28 September 2015 (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.