Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siddharth Velamoor


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 08:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Siddharth Velamoor

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I have removed the speedy deletion tag because notability is asserted by the claim that Velamoor was hired as a law clerk by United States District Court Judge David O. Carter. However, I have been unable to find any reliable sources to verify this. The first reference in the article is not a reliable source, while the second source, a blog from the Los Angeles Times doesn't even mention Velamoor. Furthermore, a Google News Archive search does not return any results. This individual appears to fails WP:BIO. Cunard (talk) 06:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC) It would be absurd not to delete this article. The subject has done nothing notable other than get an appointment to a relatively minor legal position. Any notability lies in the overactive defamatory imaginations of a tiny group of political extremists masquerading as 'patriots'. NyallM (talk) 18:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have removed some unsourced information per WP:BLP. Cunard (talk) 06:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Of relevance is this link (archivedurl) which mentions Velamoor and the Wikipedia article about Perkins Coie, his law firm; see here. Cunard (talk) 06:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a new young attorney without any claim to notability, who only got his name onto blogs (read: non RS) as the list of law clerks with his name on was put on Wikipedia as obvious OR by an IP who has in the past sockpuppeted for a banned user and who obviously has a conflict of interest. An additional problem with "recentism" (WP:NOTNEWS) is that it is always difficult to find correct NPOV information - in the case of this guy a probably erroneous legal database claims he obtained his law degree at the School of Law in Bratislava, but it seems Bratislava has no record of him studying there.--Paul Pieniezny (talk) 12:10, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I put in the speedy to start with. The page was being hacked about by a new editor at the time I saw it on Huggle. As the references in the history pages were as much use as a chocolate teapot for verifying, I decided not to revert back to them, but to place the speedy instead.  Ron h jones (Talk) 22:46, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable at any rate., regardless of how or why the article was entered  DGG ( talk ) 00:40, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:BIO. Warrah (talk) 18:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:BIO. Person is of no public interest except to a small, highly politicized group who have no problem violating someone's privacy or posting public information about a person and urging others of like mind to contact and harass the person. Thorswitch (talk) 11:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. I suppose the last vote refers to the website of Orly Taitz and to Free Republic. Unfortunately, the former is again beset with spyware and the latter is considered spam by Wikipedia - so I cannot link to either. Notwithstanding that problem, I think we should add WP:BLP to the deletion rationale. See . The last sentence there fits this article perfectly. --Paul Pieniezny (talk) 01:03, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I doubt whether being a law clerk for a federal district judge is a claim of significance at all, but this quite clearly fails WP:BIO. Tim Song (talk) 01:50, 10 November 2009 (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.