Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanjeev Kanoria


 * 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 no consensus.  Sandstein  16:01, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Sanjeev Kanoria

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Nothing in the news, books or the web that sets him apart from thousands of other similar health care CEOs. 2Joules (talk) 07:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thousands of other health care CEOs also regularly conduct 9 hour liver transplant operations (see Forbes link on page)? And own a bank in Austria, have a family foundation worth $10bn, and are trialling the use of robots for looking after old people? He's clearly not he same as "thousands of other similar health care CEOs" - whatever you think of whether he deserves an entry or not. User:213.122.163.234 (talk) 15:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Higgletonc (talk • contribs)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 13:53, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 13:53, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 13:53, 11 June 2018 (UTC)


 * note to administrators: Higgletonc is a vandal/troll, therefore his trolling should be ignored. 2Joules (talk) 15:43, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Is it vandalism or trolling to point out a difference of opinion with you 2Joules? One to which you answer not by disputing the facts but with an ad hominem attack? Need I remind you of WP:5P4? Or should I point to your own colourful history on wikipedia - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2Joules ? Let's keep to the matter at hand, hey? ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Higgletonc (talk • contribs) 13:33, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * @User:Higgletonc colorful history? WTH are you blabbering about? I have zero assumption of good faith for people who make edits like this 2Joules (talk) 15:42, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

So doing something stupid when you're young, which you regret, many years ago is beyond the pale but current accusations of sock puppetry and paid editing mean you're blameless? And still your focus is not on the matter at hand - it's the content that counts on wikipedia, not the contributor. I maintain Sanjeev Kanoria is worth of inclusion for the reasons outlined above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Higgletonc (talk • contribs) 16:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * @User:Higgletonc You have made like 10 edits, and you found your way to AFD, which is not easy to find. And you were able to learn how to add links to discussion as well. All without a single constructive edit to mainspace. Bravo! Good trolling. 2Joules (talk) 16:28, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

There is a link to AFD right at the top of Sanjeev Kanoria - not that tricky to find. Adding links to discussions - I just copied you! You know when you click edit, you can see stuff like that? And, as any one who is interested can see, I've made two constructive edits to mainspace in the last week. You've been busy since March I notice, quite a lot of your moves have been contentious. But that isn't why we're here, is it? Please can we just get back to the matter at hand and drop all this childish mud-slinging? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Higgletonc (talk • contribs) 16:38, 18 June 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:16, 18 June 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. References from reliable sources such as this one are sufficient to establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:12, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 03:17, 26 June 2018 (UTC) Agree with Eastmain "On Wikipedia the general inclusion threshold is whether the subject is notable enough for someone to have written something about that subject that has been published in a reliable source." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.163.234 (talk) 08:20, 28 June 2018 (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.