Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajesh Mahapatra


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 08:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * To explain my reasoning, none of the keep votes actually made a strong policy based arguments and the delete side provided clear evidence of coming up short after thorough source searching. To be clear, journalists are notable when people write about them in independent reliable sources (basically GNG and not inherited) so arguments to the contrary do not grip. Spartaz Humbug! 16:16, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Rajesh Mahapatra

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non notable journalist who does not meet WP:GNG. Some of the articles have been written by the subject himself. Other sources do not have in-depth, significant coverage. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 04:42, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 04:42, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Keep Definitely notable senior journalist who has been in the news himself at least twice. The references to AP articles are citations to show that he actually was AP's India correspondent. He has contributed to or participated in four or five different media platforms just based on what I have sourced so far. Additional sourcing is available which can be added by other editors or me. AltruisticHomoSapien (talk) 06:12, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Simply being a journalist does not warrant notability by itself. A topic needs to have in-depth independent coverage to meet the general criteria of notability, which the subject being discussed lacks clearly. None of the sources you cited have in-depth coverage.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 15:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * He is a senior journalist who was in the news in his capacity as a senior editor of one of India's top English language dailies. He has interviewed people such as Raghuram Rajan. He has hosted townhalls featuring Rahul Gandhi. He has moderated discussions featuring Subramanian Swamy and Jay Panda on different occasions. I have added some of these links in the External Links section. All these serve to establish his notability. AltruisticHomoSapien (talk) 20:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * We require coverage about him not by him. Can you point to even one reference that you believe has non trivial coverage. This is probably the only source that addresses the subject directly but lacks in-depth coverage and is an announcement--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 20:23, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Notability is collective. I just saw this interview AltruisticHomoSapien (talk) 20:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for putting your point forward but the subject does not seem to pass the minimum notability criteria. I would leave it to a closing admin to decide whether or not it should be kept.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 20:50, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:00, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep, has sufficient coverage to pass the standards of WP:BASIC. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 01:41, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Could you please clarify how he passes WP:BASIC and show references that you claim to have sufficient coverage?--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 15:35, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The references provided in the article that are from secondary sources are non trivial coverage, they all add up to establish notability despite the lack of in-depth coverage. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 18:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree with you that sources are all secondary. However, there are not enough non trivial sources to demonstrate the notability as per WP:BASIC.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 20:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - Seems notable if you ask me. Foxnpichu (talk) 11:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * would you mind explaining as to how he's notable?--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 15:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * As stated, the subject has several secondary non-trivial sources to back him up. Foxnpichu (talk) 20:01, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * like?--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 20:51, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Most of the sources present in the article, minus some like the Twitter one. Foxnpichu (talk) 11:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep A notable Journalist passes GNG. CleanAmbassy (talk) 03:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * GNG requires "Significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." As stated above, article is mostly sourced to articles that have been written by the subject and not independent of him, and a few passing mentions in secondary which do not add up to SIGNCOV. It clearly fails GNG.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 07:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: in-depth source analysis needed; the reliable coverage needs to be about the individual, not written by them

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar  23:48, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:JOURNALIST. The sources in the article are either a collection of his work or mentions in passing. I searched Google, JSTOR, NYT and Academic OneFile but could not find sources that profiled Mahapatra, show special recognition or report on an accolade for his work. He is not notable enough yet to have an article. Z1720 (talk) 02:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Did you check Google News? AltruisticHomoSapien (talk) 06:45, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, yes I did, and I just checked them again. The sources I found in Google News were not WP:RS because they were news articles written by Mahapatra or mentions in passing. Were there sources from Google News that you thought showed notability? If so, post them below and I will analyse them. Z1720 (talk) 22:08, 22 October 2020 (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.