Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soumya Sanathanan


 * 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. --MelanieN (talk) 04:45, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Soumya Sanathanan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The references provided within the article can only find related with Acapella, during Page Curation, i added BLP sources and Reference imporve to the article and the creator removed those tags from the page without any comments. The references are not saying any importance of article on Wikipedia. Hope some of the editors will help for discussing with this article. Josu4u (talk) 11:54, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 12:05, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ KC Velaga  ☚╣✉╠☛  13:38, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. I think the nomination needs translation into our usual terminology. As I understand it, it means: "The article is being nominated for deletion because the references do not show anything that amounts to notability." The actual question here, however, is whether the news references amount to substantial independent reliable sources. The Times of India is usually considered reliable, but it seems to have a tendency in the field of popular culture to reprint press releases, and the single paragraph here does certainly seem to be a straightforward press release.  DGG ( talk ) 18:44, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Both the articles are very relevant and complete there are many articles which doesn't even match the criteria,So please retain the pages Soumya Sanathanan as well as Preetha PV


 * Delete One of two promotional articles on non-notable subjects by the same user. As usual in such cases, the article is padded with content not supported by the sources, and gross extrapolation, for example ...which received appreciations from around the world. is supported by a single tweet that simply links to the video. The only "independent", reliable source is the TOI article DGG mentioned, which contains none of the biographical information in the wikipedia article. The latter comes from the subject's linked-in page, a perusal of which shows that the subject does not meet WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG standards of notability. Abecedare (talk) 19:35, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Abecedare (talk) 19:35, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: I have nominated the related article Preetha P V or deletion too. See the AFD nomination for details of why I believe the subjects are not only non-notable but also that these are probable instance of COI/paid-editing creations as others have suspected. Abecedare (talk) 20:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. This is just puffery - part of a PR campaign, by the looks of it. The Times of India isn't the newspaper it used to be and if it carries on its current trend it will soon be no better than The Daily Mail (UK) as a source. - Sitush (talk) 20:57, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment Each points are cleared with reference for soumya and link stands perfect I don't know why this happens...So please comment on this Vijesh Gopal and there are many which doesn't have any source and not a popular persons.So i recommend she should be in Wkipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.174.194.37 (talk) 02:13, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom and above editors. DGG's comment is also spot on. Nothing in the search engines to show this person meets either WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:56, 19 September 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.