Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seetu Kohli


 * 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 keep. Stifle (talk) 15:21, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Seetu Kohli

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Speedy deletion per WP:A7 and WP:G11 was declined by here by an editor with barely 200 edits. Disagree on A7; there is a credible claim of significance, but concur with the nominator on G11; Wikipedia is not means of promotion. Vexations (talk) 21:00, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Vexations (talk) 21:00, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Vexations (talk) 21:00, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:06, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep I got the notification for this discussion a while ago. Seetu Kohil clearly passes  the notability standards as seen in WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV.  This is also clearly seen in Google news here. Even the nominator agrees on this.  Most of the sources cited also support the above.


 * The bone of contention here is that the nominator claims the page sounded promotional.  Well, I did my best to focus on factual info while keeping the write-up neutral as much as possible. I have no  conflict of interest as alleged by the nominator. I only wrote on Seetu because I discovered she's notable and meets the wiki notability standards.


 * I guess removing the seemingly promotional tones should have been done by the nominator or any other editor since the topic actually meets the basic WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV guidelines. This should be encouraging rather than going this way.Μεταφερθείσα (talk) 05:32, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete As per nom. Completely an advertisement. D My Son  06:02, 20 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I have been wondering wny this same  "User:DMySon"  is bent on seeing this page Seetu Kohli  removed.  First he quickly tagged the page for speedy deletion  few  minutes  after it was created depsite the fact that the topic meets WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. This was declined by another editor who removed the advert claims and made the page look a bit neutral.

Now, "User:DMySon"   has come back to vote "delete" citing "completely an advertisement"  as reason despite the fact that another editor has edited the page and removed the advert claims he pointed out. Currently, this page has factual info backed up by 3rd party references. Even the AFD nominator agrees on this. I took sometine to check "User:DMySon"   contributions. I discovered he's trying to get NPR rights here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions#New_page_reviewer

He has tried in the past and got declined. He has gone about tagging pages for  Speedy deletion and AFD on regular basis, keeping a speedy deletion  log on his userspace  just to secure access at the NPR. See this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DMySon#Deletion_Log

He even asked an admin at the NPR to check his deletion log https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions#New_page_reviewer

Again, the admin declined giving him the right saying among other things ''...However, their CSD log, which they presented here, is filled with an awful lot of blue. Their DRAFTIFY log also has a few question marks for me. Their AfD log does, however, seem strong...''

I discovered that "User:DMySon"  has even tried to  seek same NPR admission help through a senior editor here on 19th July 2020

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rosguill#NPP_Admission_Request

His desperation to get NPR rights has led him to engage in continuous tagging of pages for CDS and AFD  even when those pages meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV.

He tagged Dev Mohan for AFD and then cavassed for help from another editor like in this case here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robert_McClenon#Dev_Mohan

This is quite disheartening. I am worried at this to be sincere. This is certainly not what English wikipedia is meant for.


 * A look at this page shows that the topic meets  WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. The advert issue he pointed is unclear. It has been taken care of.Μεταφερθείσα (talk) 18:45, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Sources have been provided, but there is precious little discussion of their reliability or substantiveness.
 * Delete Promotion or not, the subject isn't notable on their own. Shaurya Uniyal (talk) 08:04, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Just revived some of the topmost sources, Vogue (magazine), Deccan Chronicle, IndianTimes, Peacock Magazine and so on. The page scales through the basics of WP:GNG and the like. Also viewed the page content critically, it is not promotional from my judgement. Let's keep it. Estarosmārṭ (talk) 05:22, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - this is far from a clear case of notability. I'd need more information, such as reliability of the sources. Bearian (talk) 01:34, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 16:22, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete The added references are PR and not intellectually independent WP:SECONDARY sources. Each appearance is describing her business. All PR.   scope_creep Talk  18:10, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep I did a bit more focused search about the topic in the news, these references stood out
 * https://www.theluxurychronicle.com/ralph-lauren-home-opens-shop-in-delhi
 * https://www.business-standard.com/article/beyond-business/ralph-lauren-s-home-label-makes-foray-into-india-117093000001_1.html
 * https://in.fashionnetwork.com/news/Manish-malhotra-collaborates-with-seetu-kohli-for-manish-malhotra-mansion,1151801.html
 * https://www.thehindu.com/life-and-style/fashion/a-peek-into-falguni-shane-peacocks-flagship-store-in-delhi/article27129028.ece

The above are from reputable sources and it's clear they are organic not paid stuff. I have to add them to the appropriate areas on the page.

I also looked at these two existing references on the page
 * https://epaper.hindustantimes.com/Home/ShareArticle?OrgId=216a5f39dcb&imageview=0
 * https://www.firstpost.com/blogs/real-estate-blogs/inspiring-conversation-episode-44-with-seetu-kohli-7798311.html

These are also substantive. By the above I agree with the AFD nominator that there are significant coverage in the news regarding the topic. Hence WP:SIGCOV is fully met. I strongly go for a keep here. Jokejust1000 (talk) 19:57, 29 July 2020 (UTC) First, second-The Hindu, Hindustan Times and some others are reliable independent secondary sources, so we can keep it, but article must be rewritten from a neutral point of view. Lkomdis (talk) 07:30, 31 July 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * — Jokejust1000 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Vexations (talk) 10:52, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Subject is notable and passes the notability as per WP:GNG / WP:SIGCOV, at first glance subject sound promotional because of poor resume like writing and few PR sources but I have found some intellectually independent WP:SECONDARY references few are below.
 * , that second source, has ONE sentence that mentions Kohli: "And launched Manish Malhotra Home in partnership with luxury architect, Seetu Kohli." Stuff like "With his unrelenting energy and interminable spirit, Manish Malhotra still continues to win more acknowledgments and million hearts in this magnificent journey." doesn't exactly sound NPOV, either. More importantly, that it would be intellectually independent, as you assert, is contradicted by the fact that it was authored by "htlsspeakersbio". That's not editorial content; it's promotion Vexations (talk) 11:06, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:04, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable, PR --Devoke<b style="color:#fb0">water</b> @  12:01, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep: It seems to pass WP:BLP and WP:N. The sources seem RS and independent media coverage. I suggest to keep the page while improving it. --Harryishere (talk) 10:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This user is mentioned in Sockpuppet_investigations/Trumanshow69 11:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vexations (talk • contribs)
 * Blocked for UPE. MER-C 08:26, 7 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak keep seems to pass WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG. GiuliaZB (talk) 13:05, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep and wikify. Besides the sources present in the article and provided above in the AFD, the search with the Hindi keywords "सीटू कोहली" also brought up a good amount of news articles that are covering the subject and its activities in detail. I believe it's enough to meet WP:BASIC. Israell (talk) 14:50, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , what are those sources please? I noticed that this is only one of two AfD's that you participated in that is not related to Michael Jackson. In the other AfD, you suggested that for a Dutch subject, the search with the Russian keywords "Бен Дронкерс" and "Дронкерс, Бен" brought up a good amount of news articles that cover the subject in detail, but also failed to mention which sources those were. It should be noted that online searches can yield wildly different results, so we should not use search results as indications of notability but the sources themselves. In my case, that query yields ONE result that had nothing to do with Kohli. As for wikify, the article has already been formatted using Wiki markup, so there's not much that remains to be done there. Vexations (talk) 22:05, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * keep as refs indicate enough notability in line with WP:BIO.MissiYasında&#38;&#38; (talk) 19:12, 9 August 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.