Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rutvik Oza


 * 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. Notability j⚛e deckertalk 18:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Rutvik Oza

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Nomination is without rationale, and nominator account a sock. I was about to procedurally close, but it appears the article does in fact not meet our inclusion criteria. Apparently in parts autobiographic, references do not establish notability. Delete. Amalthea  17:10, 13 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete because 16th position in the world in 2012 in the 14-18 age group.; this person doesn't begin to meet WP:GNG, plus there's a serious COI issue there. The rest of the claims do not seem to be backed by the sources given. § FreeRangeFrog croak 17:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: I advise other editors to have a close look at the contributions of the article's Tweedledum and Tweedledee creator and creator-via-AfC: and, respectively, both of whom have a strong interest in members of the Oza family. הסרפד  (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 18:44, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, this is strange, and it follows a pattern I see on the other article. They create a bio essentially promoting the person, and then claim at the end that they suffer schizophrenia or autism? Weird. § FreeRangeFrog croak 18:51, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Nothing weird at all. I'm not ashamed of having a mental illness, and why do you assume that anyone else would be? Would you find it weird if an otherwise promotional article said that its subject had cancer? Phil Bridger (talk) 22:35, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The strangeness comes from the fact that it's repeated in the same manner, with the same wording and with the same structure in both articles. And both claims are unsourced. May I ask how exactly my offhand comment implies or insinuates that they (or anyone else) should be 'ashamed' of an illness? § FreeRangeFrog croak 23:41, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I took your "weird" to mean that there is some kind of inconsistency between an article being promotional and it mentioning mental illness. If that wasn't your intention then that's great, although I don't see what could be thought weird about two user ids with the same surname writing about two members of the same family coming up with similar wording and article structure. They are obviously either the same person or two people working together. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:14, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete On the basis that the subject gives all of the notability guidelines a wide berth. Pol430   talk to me  22:33, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 16:54, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 16:54, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 16:54, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. None of the sources presented in the article are reliable; does not pass WP:GNG. Salih  ( talk ) 06:47, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. -- No  unique  names  02:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I am the author of the work and I request to delete the article as it seems to be non-notable. Deep P. Patel 21:55, 19 December 2012 (IST)
 * 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.