Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sameep Kulkarni


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 19:57, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Sameep Kulkarni

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete Poorly references and media clippings mostly mention about events.Buzz in the town cant be used as RS or reliable reference.I recommend deletion of the article.Also techgross e magazine provide just an interview in which it is likely that he speaks about himself.Above all the subject writes the article about himself.Self promotion is not allowed in wikipedia.Other media clippings not necessarily can establish notability. --Poet009 (talk) 18:06, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete With regard to significant coverage almost all the web sources have coverage that is either insignificant, written like a news release, or, in the case of techgoss, consists of statements by the subject on a website with unclear notability. The Indian Express source and the MiD DAY coverage should better but reading them one comes away thinking they don't impart not actual information and heavily rely on quoting the subject. Since this is a musician article I checked WP:MUSICBIO and I don't see any criterion here. Hekerui (talk) 19:15, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Do not delete the article, but please edit the article wherever required. There are many links you can google and see which gives good citation. If required, you can compact the article. I feel the info is quite notable. Thats what I feel sincerely !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inthememory07 (talk • contribs) 06:39, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Strong Delete- Ignore the above vote by Inthememory07.It has been casted by the subject himself.He has only joined wikipedia to promote himself as seen from his contribution history.Wikipedia is not here for helping upcoming artists to gain popularity.According to wiki policiesWP:MUSICBIO the article should be deleted.Non notable subject and self promotion.--Poet009 (talk) 16:40, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Keep the article and work on it. poet009 is bit of biased it seems. Aaprt from this I feel there are plenty of artists need to be on wikipedia, wiki is for the information. Subject is meeting many of the criteria required by wiki e.g. point number 9 Monika 123 1 (talk) 13:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC) — Monika 123 1 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete again- User Monika123 casting the above vote appears to be a new join from the same place of that of the subject.Good way to support.Dear Sameep, I am just applying wiki principles upon your page.WP:MUSICBIO shows there is nothing in this article due to which it should be kept.There are thousands like you in the music world.Nothing but just a self promoter.So Delete.--Poet009 (talk) 15:11, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Poet009, cast one !vote only, please. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  00:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete no Kulkarni"&hl=en&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=LrWvTLvUFY_Zngeep-meBg&ved=0CA8QpwU&fp=2c832ee43120520d sources found; those in the article don't all even have to do with the subject. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  00:21, 9 October 2010 (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.