Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srushti Jayant Deshmukh


 * 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. Complex / Rational 14:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Srushti Jayant Deshmukh

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

Per WP:BLP1E, not notable for anything beyond a single event. Mako001 (C) (T)  🇺🇦 13:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 13:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete She scores 5th highest in the country on the civil service exam. Hasn't gotten into politics yet nor worked in any GNG-worthy job. Might be a case for GNG, but I can't see much beyond interviews about her and some fluffy coverage. I'd be more inclined to keep if she had gotten a noteworthy job in some capacity. Oaktree b (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 15:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: IAS Officers (even of Metropolis city) are not notable. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk ! 15:28, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Leaning keep but unsure. Lots of media coverage, but I'm not skilled at evaluating Indian sources. CT55555 (talk) 15:44, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If my leaning keep is the only thing stopping a SNOW close as delete, then I would not object to such a close. CT55555 (talk) 01:03, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Numerous candidates pass the UPSC exam each year. It does not imply that they are noteworthy for a Wikipedia entry. Tictictoc (talk) 16:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC) (WP:SOCKSTRIKE — DaxServer (t · m · c) 18:38, 10 January 2023 (UTC))
 * Delete However, she gets a lot more media coverage from reliable sources, but these are all her interviews, so these sources are primary to her, which does not meet the criteria of GNG for now. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 19:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - based on the coverage I have found, it appears WP:TOOSOON for WP:BASIC notability, e.g. UPSC results 2019: Meet Bhopal’s Srushti Deshmukh, topper among women candidates (Hindustan Times, April 2019, brief coverage, includes nonindependent quotes), Srishti Deshmukh, AIR 5, cleared UPSC exams in first attempt; prepared for IAS by watching RSTV (Zee News, updated July 2021, Instagram images with brief captions), IAS Srushti Deshmukh's marksheet goes viral? Had cracked UPSC exam in 1st attempt (DNA, updated Sept 2022, brief biographical coverage, includes her statements). IAS officers can be notable, but sustained coverage of their career is helpful for avoiding WP:BLP1E issues. Beccaynr (talk) 19:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment - enough in-depth media coverage. WP:BLP1E can be considered. These all are notable for WP:BLP1E. This one also can be considered to keep as per the logic. Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete She got a lot of media coverage from reliable sources, but these are all her interviews, so these sources are primary to her, which does not meet the criteria of GNG for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexandar Garcia (talk • contribs) 21:13, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. The existing sources and sources per my WP:BEFORE appear to be routine announcements or pieces mainly quotes failing the SIGCOV requirement of WP:GNG or the non-triviality requirement of WP:BASIC. Other WP:NBIO criteria are failed, additionally, the pieces almost exclusively focuses on the civil service exams placement, which is a case of WP:BLP1E.  VickKiang  (talk)  02:50, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom a case of WP:BLP1E. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:47, 13 January 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.