Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siddharth Batra (2nd 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  14:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Siddharth Batra
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Subject fails WP:NPROF and ANYBIO. There is only one citation about the subject (This from Forbes) and it's a glowing piece not independent of the subject, possibly paid for. Nothing else I've found (you have to ignore the Bollywood personality of the same name) shows any notability of this subject. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 16:00, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, India,  and California.  Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 16:01, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete It does not have the criteria of complete wiki recognition. Khtibkiarash (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2023 (UTC) —  is a confirmed sock puppet of . Mz7 (talk) 02:14, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance,  and Technology.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:30, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - No significant coverage found. Even the Forbes piece is from 10 years ago and if he was notable I would think there would be more coverage since then. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:21, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note that I restored this following a soft deletion per this request to my Talk because it was essentially an expired PROD. No opinion on article merit and unlikely to look into it during this discussion. Please ping me if any further action needed. Star   Mississippi  02:29, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per my previous nomination plus 's rationale there. Steven Walling &bull; talk  19:40, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per my opinion in the first AfD: he clearly does not pass WP:PROF and the sourcing is either too dubiously reliable or too much about other topics like the companies he has worked for to count for WP:GNG. The article is more or less the same as it was then, so there is no new sourcing in it to evaluate. The restoration request lists some new information, but it is still about companies rather than the subject himself, so the same rationale applies to it too. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:46, 22 October 2023 (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.