Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sindhu Joy


 * 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. no consensus at all for deletion JForget  02:13, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Sindhu Joy

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Sindhu Joy is not notable enough for a WP bio. She contested a parliament election and lost but doesn't give her any major role in politics. She was a student leader and addicted to various social networking services like Facebook or Orkut. Would that make for a WP article? She was awarded PhD in some subject recently, which she calls An alter in the living as of Sindhu Joy towards Dr Sindhu Joy She fails WP:Bio. This article can be a troll magnet due to her controversial career, too. No worries deleted. --117.204.85.175 (talk) 16:59, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, Google news seems to have enough material about her career as a student leader to satisfy notability concerns.. (NB, I completed the nomination proces on behalf of the IP nominator.) –– Jezhotwells (talk) 12:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  —  Salih  ( talk ) 15:46, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Enough coverage in mainstream media (starting from 2002) to satisfy WP:GNG. Coverage isn't limited to her failed candidacies, but focuses mainly on her role as a student leader ( to clarify: being a "student leader" in Kerala is not just restricted to campus activities. It is a highly visible and higly politicised role.) --Sodabottle (talk) 16:12, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: When there is a more specific point in policy like WP:Politician it is better to start from there. Especially so, since our subject's assumed notability is solely based on her political career. I think she would fail wp:politician although she has been much in the news recently due firstly, to her candidacy, secondly, to some controversies. --117.204.89.8 (talk) 16:41, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * First, coverage predates her candidacy and second "some controversies" is how lot of subjects get coverage. As long as the article is balanced and does not violate WP:UNDUE, i don't see any harm in having the article. If the coverage had been restricted to her electoral history alone, WP:POLITICIAN would apply here, but since it is not, i would say it meets the Base criteria for WP:BIO which is coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources and subject has plenty of it. (and note the references added are just English ones, there must be lot more Malayalam sources)--Sodabottle (talk) 16:53, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I beg your pardon. I can't see any indepth and significant coverage of lasting nature in the media except electoral, which as you know is ephemeral and needs to be discounted per the aspects of  policy we both cited. When you say, there is no harm in keeping the bio, I suggest you to do a check on the history of the article. Time and  again highly inappropriate material has been added.--117.204.89.8 (talk) 17:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * We agree to disagree then. I took a look the article history as you suggested. most of the disruptive edits seems to come from IPs. I have watchlisted the article and keep an eye on it. If (the article survives the AfD and) the disruptive edits continue, i will ask an admin to semi protect it. --Sodabottle (talk) 17:21, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:38, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets the test of "significant coverage in reliable sources". --Mkativerata (talk) 18:12, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep "currently the National Vice President of Students Federation of India" is alone a fairly good indication of notability IMO, and there is clearly plenty of coverage in reliable sources. DES (talk) 23:48, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I would be more inclined to accept this if she were he president, not the VP. For one think, some such organisations have multiple VPs.    DGG ( talk ) 06:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * DGG is correct. there are currently four--Sodabottle (talk) 13:39, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * and there are hundreds of student organisations in India. --117.204.82.201 (talk) 16:51, 19 March 2010 (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.