Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shrey Srivastava


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 10:20, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Shrey Srivastava

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Clearly failing notability inclusion Arthistorian1977 (talk) 12:50, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Musa  Talk  14:58, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  Musa  Talk  14:58, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

WikipediaMaster432: It does explain why it is notable. This is because he has inspired many people to start trading on the stock market, and has served as an inspiration to many. He is also the first of his kind to make a popular blog on finance and economics (which I will add now) and I think that this is enough to prove his notability. A 15 year old with a blog on finance and economics, the first of its kind, is a rare enough person to be featured on an encyclopaedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikipediaMaster432 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I think it should be kept as well, it clearly states his notability and significance, and I think someone as special as this kid is notable enough to be included here - IJustWantToLive — Preceding unsigned comment added by IJustWantToLive (talk • contribs) 19:12, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah you should keep this, people would want to read it — Preceding unsigned comment added by RaymondBarnes999 (talk • contribs) 06:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

TheLogicalAfrican: I've seen this guy's blog, and judging from the hits on it and the quality of the blog, I think this page should be kept. it says why he's notable and credible as well and gives citations, so there aren't really any reasons to delete this article. wikipediamaster said it all before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheLogicalAfrican (talk • contribs) 12:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Wow ... all the Keep votes are coming from the editors, who are just created with no other contributions. An attack of sockpuppets? SBaker43 (talk) 16:31, 13 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - I'm sure he's most unusual; I just can't find WP:RSs that say so; hence not notable.
 * Note to closing administrator. WikipediaMaster432, IJustWantToLive, RaymondBarnes999, and TheLogicalAfrican are ✅ sock accounts. See Sockpuppet investigations/WikipediaMaster432.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:25, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  15:33, 19 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Content from confirmed socks above has been struck per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. North America1000 09:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Just another blogger kid who wants to have his own Wikipedia page. 59.88.205.154 (talk) 14:45, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:GNG. The only source that appears to be reliable that covers this person is here - it was recently published, appears to be more of a local story than a national headline, and it's the only source that I can find that covers this person what-so-ever. Significant coverage is required per to assert notability of an article subject, and I don't believe that this is established. Hence, it fails WP:GNG.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:14, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Lack of significant coverage. One newspaper interview isn't sufficient. 2601:188:0:ABE6:78F9:225E:C72:122C (talk) 15:06, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, as said immediately above, one news interview isn't coverage in multiple reliable independent sources. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:37, 29 November 2015 (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.