Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary


 * 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 no consensus. Despite being a biography of a living person, the article has undergone significant sourcing improvements since the nomination, so I feel the best close is as such. Regards,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 16:06, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The person has one reliable news link, nothing else that I could find confirming inclusion as a Wikipedia BLP. Request AfD. '' ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ  ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣  10:05, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. SGGH ping! 11:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, i've seen this dude on tv several times during India matches (some thing like an Indian version of chacha cricket). But I agree that there is not much verifiable info on him - there are a lot of image hits for this guy if you google around, but not much info - some of them report his name as "Sudhir Kumar Gautam". See following links: http://cricketnext.in.com/slideshow/p0/g361/f15/view.html, http://www.tribuneindia.com/2007/20070516/sports.htm, http://thatscricket.oneindia.in/news/2009/11/24/police-apologise-to-sachin-fan.html

No comments on whether to retain the article - just giving some info to help you guys decide. May be you could ask the creator of the article for back up.

Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 18:51, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete -- per nom. — Aaroncrick  ( talk )   05:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. I added some references mentioned here and a photo, and I think the article is now good enough to show notability. - Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:28, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  — Eastmain (talk • contribs)  15:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions.  — Eastmain (talk • contribs)  15:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have added a few more references.Earliest coverage dates to 2003 and continues till now. Enough to show notability.--Sodabottle (talk) 16:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete What next, does Luke Gillian, (aka Lukey Sparrow) get an article? Lukey even follows the team when it plays away. Following a sports team around on its home matches does not make one notable, it makes one an ordinary sports fan like thousands of others. Mattinbgn\talk 19:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * But mainstream newspapers writing about him does make him notable and different from other fans. There is a category of sports spectators with 29 pages on it for various sports. And all of them have good coverage to meet WP:GNG.--Sodabottle (talk) 04:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per Sodabottle. As an Australian, I automatically thought of this man, and sure enough - he had an article as well. You don't expect many supporters to be notable - but mainstream media coverage is indeed the key, and there are a few who get it. StAnselm (talk) 10:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, despite my dislike for such articles, this one is a clearly notable fan and is regularly covered by the media for his antics. I can't find the news bit now, but last year he had asked for free tickets to some games and Pawar refused or some such thing and it was covered quite widely. He hasn't yet received as much coverage as Percy Abeysekara though, and is still in third place among subcontinent cricket fans. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff 


 * Delete, if this article is allowed to be kept it will create an annoying precedent of people creating articles just because they turn up to more cricket matches than most folk. What next? The diehard Ireland fan who travels across the globe to watch them (his name slips my mind)? Delete, not notable in terms of his contribution to the game, which is other than being a vocal supporter, none. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The criteria here is not "contribution to the game" but notability which is established by coverage in secondary sources / mainstream media. Subject has had a fair amount of coverage and according to WP:GNG that is enough. And this is not setting a precedent, this is the 29th article in the sports spectator category.--Sodabottle (talk) 13:23, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment I'd like editors to consider the following points. I see seven news links that have been placed in the article. Of these, four links talk about "Sudhir Kumar Gautam". Although one may be led to perceive that Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary and Sudhir Kumar Gautam are one and the same (one editor has given this connection within the article too), is there a news link that makes that direct connection? Could there be two different fans out there (well, "Gautam" and "Chaudhary" are two very different surnames) from a similar geography following a similar path? That leaves us with three clean news reports. I'll list them here one by one:


 * Cricinfo link - Cumulative mention within the article of Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary is as follows, "Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary says that Tendulkar gives him match tickets and in an outlandish show of gratitude, he's been delivering an absurd number of fruits to his idol since 2004. Sudhir also goes to extraordinary pains to watch cricket, even of the dullest variety. He rode a bicycle all the way to Bangladesh to watch the Indians in action and hopes to return in time to harvest his litchis."


 * Tribune - This link is not even to a news article but to a section called 'Briefly'. The cumulative mention is as follows, "Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary, a cricket fan, has the Indian flag painted on his body by an artist in Amritsar on Saturday. In support of the cricket series between Pakistan and India, Chaudhary is on a bicycle journey which began on January 19 in Bihar and will end at the Wagah Border on Sunday. — AFP"


 * DNA India. The only article with a significant mention of Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary.


 * If one significant news report and two clearly trivial news reports are enough to qualify for WP:NOTABILITY, keep the article. Else, delete it. '' ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ  ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣  19:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It is obvious to me that both are one and the same. They have the photo of the same person. Here is a couple of media reports that identifies him by just the given name "Sudhir Kumar". In the Indian name context, sometimes people use different surnames - sometimes caste name ("Chaudhary" is one such) is used as surname or sometimes the given name of the father is used as surname. Can there be two different persons from Muzzafarpur, Bihar a)who follow the indian team around b)with the same body art c)who bicycle to the same places at the same date d)whose photographs look very very similar e)who have the same given name.f) are of the same age e)claim that they get free tickets from Tendulkar? Just compare these two reports from 2007- DNAIndia and Times of India . When i saw the AfD, I looked for sources and found them. I added them, clarified the article. Perhaps i shouldn't have read WP:DUCK. An appeal to the closing admin - please go through the other six news links and decide whether this is an issue of OR or just plain commonsense.--Sodabottle (talk) 04:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Sodabottle. Appreciate your viewpoints. Btw, WP:DUCK is a behavioural essay, not an editing guideline and should never be followed while editing. Common sense would be a more pertinent point to follow. Let me put things in context.


 * Things encouraging us to keep this article


 * The man is a news item.


 * Like I mentioned, a Common sense approach makes us believe Chaudhary and Gautam are one and the same.


 * 'If' Chaudhary and Gautam are one and the same, there are two good significant mentions.


 * The article was nominated for AfD when there was no link. Today there're seven.


 * Very experienced editors whose views I value (like SpacemanSpiff) vouch for the notability.


 * Sticky points


 * There is still no link that makes the direct relation between Chaudhary and Gautam being one and the same.


 * Even if finally Chaudhary and Gautam are one and the same, leave two (three?) links, all others are extremely trivial mentions that would never qualify as significant.


 * WP:WWIN points to the fact that he is surely a news item with his body paint; and all I see are (indiscriminate??) news articles (leave two/three), questionable endurable notability (you know about him, I don't).


 * Where do I stand on this issue? Same place as in my last comment :) But I have to say, you've worked hard on the article. '' ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ  ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣  06:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the compliment :-). Reading back what i wrote, it seems i fit the WP:NOCOMMON second paragraph description very well (While it's quite acceptable to explain your own actions by saying, "it seemed like common sense to me," you should be careful not to imply that other editors are lacking in common sense, which may be seen as uncivil). I apologize. I have one point and one question - (assuming both sudhir kumars are the same person), there are four non trivial coverage news items (in the sense entire article is written about the subject) - refs 2,3,4 and 9. There are actually more reports, but they are duplicates of nos 3 and 4, as they are agency reports picked up by multiple media outlets. So are four "non trivial" news reports enough to meet WP:GNG?--Sodabottle (talk) 13:56, 18 February 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.