Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sagar Aryal (3rd nomination)


 * 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.  Sandstein  19:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Sagar Aryal
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not meet WP:GNG and WP:A7 applies. The article is written like a CV. nirmal (talk) 05:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. nirmal (talk) 05:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 07:41, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. nirmal (talk) 07:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:19, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:19, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: By all indications, this article is on a different subject than that of previous AFDs. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:22, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair point - the previous AfDs related to this person, a young green activist associated with a "Plant for the Planet" initiative. The two will need to be distinguished for this AfD. AllyD (talk) 11:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. The most relevant notability guideline here is WP:PROF. The subject is a current PhD student, with an h-index of 5 and top-cited paper with 14 cites in GScholar, way too low for WP:PROF. There are several awards listed but they are mostly student level/promise awards or else not sufficiently significant to indicate notanility under either WP:PROF or WP:PROF on their own. The case for WP:GNG/WP:BIO is also too weak as with the exception of the Kathmandou Post article, the other sources are either primary or non-independent or both. In any case, for a GNG pass for a blogger, I think we'd need a great deal more significant independent coverage than is indicated here right now. Nsk92 (talk) 13:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete totally fails the academic notability guidelines. Also does not pass the writer notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:17, 4 March 2021 (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.