Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srinivas Mylavarapu


 * 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   speedy delete per WP:CSD. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Srinivas Mylavarapu

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Prod was contested. Does not appear to meet WP:PROF notability guidelines. Though article does present a list of accomplishments, you could make a similar list for nearly any active academic (i.e., so-and-so demonstrated something that hasn't been demonstrated before). Most journal articles either attempt to demonstrate something new or support/refute an existing hypothesis. Per WP:PROF, no third-party sources covering this person's notability/accomplishments. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- Pete.Hurd (talk) 22:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Question: Perhaps an admin can check whether this article was delete before. When I Google "Srinivas Mylavarapu" I actually find a cached page from June 19, although the current article appears to have been created on June 25. --Crusio (talk) 22:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Answer It was deleted before, but it was an article about a different individual with the same name. OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:04, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete, hoax. When I Google "Srinivas Mylavarapu", Mylavarapu linguistics, Mylavarapu Gainesville, Mylavarapu Kui, or Mylavarapu Dravidian, I don't find anything that looks like this entry. There is a Prof. Mylavarapu in Gainesville.... in Soil Science.... The homepage of that person (who has a different first name) is linked as the 2nd reference. The part of the linkage of genes to languages is definitely nonsense. Some genes have been linked to general language abilities, but there are obviously no genes linked to any specific language. There are genetic mouse models of language deficits (weird as that may sound), but that concerns one specific gene that is not mentioned in this article. I have no clue what "internal Auger emitters" are, but I don't see how anything related to language abilities could have anything to do with oogenesis or spermatogenesis. In short, this is a hoax. As this appears to be the second creation of this article, perhaps it should be salted. --Crusio (talk) 23:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * PS The same editor has also created a page for Velu Ganapathy, currently prodded. Something similar seems to be going on there. A reference to an article in the Am J Physiol Cell Physiol is given and that article indeed lists an author named Ganapathy, but with a different first name: Vadivel. I haven't checked the other two references but bet that that one is a hoax, too. --Crusio (talk) 23:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict - and Crusio beat me to reporting on this too) if hoax, then these  ought also to be reverted promptly. Pete.Hurd (talk) 23:21, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * PS2 The creator of this article User:Sanjaykrishn has made only one other contribution to Wikipedia, on the page List of people from Andhra Pradesh, where he added a wikilink to "Srinivas Mylavarapu, composer", suddenly not alinguist studying mice and genes any more.... --Crusio (talk) 23:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've deleted some mentions elsewhere in WP as suspected hoaxes. FWIW Srinivas Mylavarapu & Velu Ganapathy overlap as putative notable alumni of the same High School, just going to check a hunch on where the contributing IPs come from... Pete.Hurd (talk) 23:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * And this time Pete beat me... :-) If you browse through the edit history of Srinivas Mylavarapu, you'll see that he "evolved" from being born in 1990 to being born in 1960. Earlier version also have a picture of what obviously is a schoolkid. Enough already, let's get rid of this stuff. --Crusio (talk) 23:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, per Crusio. A definite hoax. Nsk92 (talk) 05:24, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as vandalistic hoax CSD:G3. Pete.Hurd (talk) 19:15, 30 June 2008 (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.