Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V.V.L.N.Sastry


 * 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. NW ( Talk ) 00:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

V.V.L.N.Sastry

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Inadequately sourced BLP?, was deleted as a prod but restored upon request. Notability not demonstrated by non-trivial multiple reliable sources. Fails V, N, BIO & BLP. Spartaz Humbug! 16:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh I forgot to mention this looks like an autobiography too... so COI issues to deal with too. Spartaz Humbug! 16:26, 18 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Dear Spartaz., V.V.L.N.Sastry is an ideal person to many economically middle class aspirants to become some thing great in life. The article was placed by me as a third person. While keeping this article, many secondary sources available on google search have been used. I donot know how to improvise the article as I am not familiar with software, I also donot know, how to mention references in the running text.  But I found more than 3,500 references about him on the net from credible sources including bloomberg, dowjones, wall street journal and forbes magazine.  You can hlep me in improvising this. But my lack of skills in putting the article should not be a deterrent in profiling a great personality.  Regards. Lakshmi Siddhi  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakshmisiddhi (talk • contribs) 17:02, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- - Spaceman  Spiff  17:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Many reliable sources about V.V.L.N.Sastry can be found in google search. one can click the following url  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakshmisiddhi (talk • contribs) 17:32, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

====Lot many reliabe sources about V.V.L.N.Sastry

Dearest Friends, For god's sake, please do not delete this article. Ignorance is sin. But we can enlighten ourselves with a simple google search on V.V.L.N.Sastry, lot of credible sources and updates. Click the URL. Lakshmi SiddhiLakshmisiddhi (talk) 17:45, 18 October 2009 (UTC)--Lakshmisiddhi (talk) 17:45, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, all it needs is some inline references Shii (tock) 20:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Um, which inline references? not having proper sources is why this is at AFD. Spartaz Humbug! 02:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sources do exist beyond that Oriental haze-- a lot of Indian articles look like this, and only need improvement, not deletion. Shii (tock) 18:41, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I didn't see substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, again. Not notable. Not the subject of any secondary source material. WP:BIO Bladeofgrass (talk) 11:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Unless there is evidence of this guy in reliable sourcesWP:RS (and someone may need to help out with this because perhaps only those intimately familiar with India can point out that there are in fact reliable sources), it should be deleted. Out of a compasionate interpretation of WP:BLP. --Firefly322 (talk) 12:23, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * KEEP ITI have found this guy in reliable sources. I am from India and found that the sources placed in the article are reliable and noteworthy. windsirWindsir (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)--Windsir (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC) — Windsir (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * ""KEEP"" references are added. Some more citations are required to be added, The main thing is to add them, Keep It.WindsirWindsir (talk) 12:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You only get to vote once so please strike one keep please and please can you provide the sources you are referring to? Arguments by assertion tend to get ignored so evidence based responses are the most valuable. Spartaz Humbug! 15:33, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * KEEP KEEPSpartaz, An Indian can only understand, how popular the other Indian is? As an Indian, I vouch for the content. Sastry is a popular and noted personality in India. The article did not touch the valueble contributions made by him towards the society and living. May be you can add one more section to the contents with a title Contributions so that I can post the contributions of sastry. Even with the existing material there, you can keep the same.Stewartprabha (talk) 17:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC) — Stewartprabha (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Comment These Keep votes seem a bit heated and unorthodox at best (if not off-the-wall). (Is there a wiff of WP:meatpuppetry?) But in the interests of "international relations" :-), here's a list of possible sources that I can't sort through, because their relevance or irrelevance requires a more sensitive understanding of the culture than I possess.  But if some of these KEEP !voters (per WP:AGF, I hope there is more than one such !voter and none of them are in WP:COI trouble) could sort through them, I think there is a good chance of getting this article out of AfD successfully. --Firefly322 (talk) 18:34, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell none of those sources are about the subject of this article, he's just quoted in them. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:35, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, that can be enough to establish someone notable. See WP:Prof where it states that Criterion 7 may be satisfied, for example, if the person is frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert in a particular area. A small number of quotations, especially in local news media, is not unexpected for academics and so falls short of this mark..  He's not a professor but he's an expert of some kind and whatever policy would govern that should have an analogous method of notability establishment. --Firefly322 (talk) 20:58, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Prof is for academics not media talkingheads. Spartaz Humbug! 02:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep. I said that up front. So repeating it indicates what? Is this supposed to mean that if someone is quoted often in the media, then only if they are also a professor can they be notable? Also for someone who accussed me of "assuming bad faith", I think it's mindblowing that you as an administator just called this person a "media talkinghead". Not sure what moral high ground or such example you're trying to set, but it's failing miserably. --Firefly322 (talk) 03:00, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete - non-notable businessman. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  04:22, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Dont Delete Hey guys, what kind of sources you need, are you guys asking to delete this article are aware of Indian Personalities. I have seen many biographies on wikipedia, you mean to say all of them are as per standards. Why you are trying to discriminate an upcoming guy with your irrational comments of delete, delete. The person V.V.L.N.Sastry has many notable sources.  He is quoted in Forbes Magzine, he is quoted in India Knwoledge at Wharton Business School, He is quoted in Bloomberg, He is quoted in Dow Jones.  Google search of his name is showing more than 3000 links. You guys mean to say, a non-notable person will get such kind of updates that too more than 3000 and on daily basis. He is noteworthy, that is why he is quoted. He is quoted for his rational comments on economy, business and industry.  He is quoted because his comments are notable. Hence KEEP THIS ARTICLE.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venkatraman111 (talk • contribs) 06:50, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Dont Delete Hey guys, what kind of sources you need, Are you guys aware of Indian Personalities? or you mean to say some of the established sources from India like Economic Times, Financial Express, Business India or Fortune India are inferior sources as per you? I dont understand, what exactly you mean by notable sources. Just because you guys donot have geographical knwoledge, doesnot mean the credible indian perosnalities or indian sources are inferior. I have seen many biographies on wikipedia, you mean to say all of them are as per standards. Why you are trying to discriminate an upcoming guy with your irrational comments of delete, delete. The person V.V.L.N.Sastry has many notable sources.  He is quoted in Forbes Magzine, he is quoted in India Knwoledge at Wharton Business School, He is quoted in Bloomberg, He is quoted in Dow Jones.  Google search of his name is showing more than 3000 links. You guys mean to say, a non-notable person will get such kind of updates that too more than 3000 and on daily basis. He is noteworthy, that is why he is quoted. He is quoted for his rational comments on economy, business and industry.  He is quoted because his comments are notable. Hence KEEP THIS ARTICLE.Venkatraman111 (talk) 06:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC) — Venkatraman111 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep ItI agree with Venkatraman and also I agree with Firefly 322, The criteria for notability as per me is a person getting notified for his works, contributions etc., Here is a person, V.V.L.N.Sastry whose works in the areas of economics and financial mangement are clearly visible as quotes, TV appearances, quotes in leading Indian Magzines and Financial News Papers, International News Magzines and Financial Press. Simple Google search of his name is revealing bucket's full of overflowing information about this gentleman, what else is required to establish his notability. I strongly vote for keeping the article on wikipedia or else it will lead to discrimination and injustice as stated by Lakshmi Siddhi too.Maheshmanjrekar (talk) 13:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC) — Maheshmanjrekar (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * KEEP The link provided here in provides information about Sastry,Dr.V.V.L.N.Sastry. Most of these links are available with India based leading News Agencies and News Paper Publisher's Websites. I am sure the other ediotrs at Wikipedia respects the local standards of India and doesnot question the India based sources for notability.  I fully agree with others who voted for keeping the article. If possible improvise it.RameshChavan (talk) 16:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * response - the problem is not that his notability is based in India; but rather that being quoted in news reports and interviewed as part of a story on some other topic does not constitute the "substantial coverage" which we need to attest notability. Many times, this kind of passing mention reflects nothing more than that the subject knows a reporter, and that the reporter knows he/she can come to the subject for a quick couple of paragraphs or a soundbite on the topic of the story. Where are the articles about Sastry, as opposed to merely quoting him? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:03, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The Wall St reference is him saying something (one sentence quoted) that anybody could have said. Another two references are to Google search. I've gone into the pdf twice (and found it extremely hard going - and it crashed on me twice). Appears to contain long lists of names - speakers? Are they all notable? Several references are uncheckable by me. Being an associate director and being quoted are not necessarily indicators of notability. The parade of new accounts in support - but not providing the evidence asked for - does not help matters. The more prominent the chorus, often the less prominent the 'star'. If there is evidence, please let us have it. Contrary to some opinions, we do not want to delete all new articles. We do want to have them fit the requirements. Peridon (talk) 19:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * PS Referring to lists of Google searches also doesn't help. If the stuff is in there, put it on the table. Most of us haven't the time to check out every link there. There maybe some gold hidden there. Show us. Peridon (talk) 19:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Given that he's quoted by the WSJ and Forbes regularly, one would expect someone to have written about him. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find anything at all about him. In the absence of any of the SPAs finding something about him in reliable sources, this has to be deleted. - Spaceman  Spiff  00:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP ITcoverage by BUSINESS INDIA ABOUT SASTRYshould solve the problem of all those writing here without any reasoning by advocating deletion of the artilce. Business India is the leading Business Magzine from India.  Business India has profiled Sastry, which should satisfy the view of a third party clearly mentioning the merits of sastry and also talking about acheivements and the contributions made by him. CHEERSRameshChavan (talk) 17:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * warning- That is not a link to Business India; it is a link to Sastry's own company's website, where some material is posted which purports to be from sources like Business India. The subject's own website is not a reliable source. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

^^^^^'LISTEN'^^^^^That need not be a link to Business India, for that matter, Business India doesnot keep their content on website, it's a book publication very popular and top rated business magzine. The clipping put on to the website is authentic. If one needs to go by Orangamike, to identify a person, he may say that, the person should sit with their parents. Even when some one is trying to identify with ample sources, he doesnot want to listen and see logic. HEY LISTEN, Orangemike. High Time. NgandhiInd (talk) 17:24, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment In the absence of a more Sastry-focused reference, Orangemike, Peridon, and SpacemanSpiff views must "win the day." (I'm unstriking my delete !vote.). --Firefly322 (talk) 22:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weird The subject's company asks people to visit Wikipedia for his profile. I think an early close per This isn't myspace and it's getting stale would be appropriate. - Spaceman  Spiff  01:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see that on the link your provide. Has it changed? DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * '''SpacemanSpiff, I don't see your observation Weird on the link you provided? Why are you wrongly posting here and trying to malign the image of sastry? NgandhiInd (talk) 16:47, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks like it has been removed, they appear to keep track of this discussion. - Spaceman  Spiff  16:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

@@@@@SpacemanSpiff!!!!! Stop justifying your wrong act of faulty links and your weird attempts by trying to spoil the image of others and trying to create some image for yourself. See the point pro-activelyNgandhiInd (talk) 16:51, 22 October 2009 (UTC) — NgandhiInd (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * I clicked SpacemanSpiff's link earlier today and saw the ref to Wikipedia. Cassandra 73 (talk) 17:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Cassandra, When I clicked SpacemanSpiff's link earlier today I did not find the reference to Wikipedia. NgandhiInd (talk) 17:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * '''STRANGE NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN BY Orangemike, Peridon, and SpacemanSpiff without any logic. I visited the subject's companylink and there is no link to wikipedia. Likewise, the business india coverage is show cased in the subject's website. What's the wrong in it. I think Orangemike, Peridon, and SpacemanSpiff are suspecting their own images. Please stop this negative propaganda.  KEEP KEEP KEEP ARTICLERameshChavan (talk) 12:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC) — RameshChavan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * '''I dont agree with Orangemike. If the subject's own company carries the coverage of independent media articles and if they are referred as the views of indpendent agencies, what's the wrong in it? You mean to say, Business India which is a fortnighlty magzine, should store this on their website for Orngemike to believe that the source is independent.  Very strange. For your informaion, Business India is a leading fortnighlty business magzine read by all the business men in India and they dont keep their magzine on website as they sell their magzine in physical book form.RameshChavan (talk) 12:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC) — RameshChavan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * '''Presence of another credible third party coverage Fortune India Coverage of Sastry. Fortune India coverage show cased in the website of sastry's company. With Business India coverage already linked by Ramesh and with my present link, it is more than enough to establish that Sastry is notable. Two great magzines from India covering this youngster cannot be ignored. Keep the articleLakshmisiddhi (talk) 14:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC) — Lakshmisiddhi (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * clarification - There is a misunderstanding here. We have no prejudice against the many fine people of India; I'm proud to say I've created or improved several articles on Indian topics myself, both here and on the Esperanto Wikipedia. The problem is that while we accept citations from prominent publications such as Business India, for reasons of verifiability, we cannot citations from undated purported quotes from such publications which are hosted on the subject's company's own website. Why? Because using modern software, it would be simple for me to create a purported article like that on my personal website, claiming that I had founded crores of important companies and enriched every dalit in Chattisgarh with my market brilliance! In this era of Bernard Madoff and the like, we must be vigilant about what could be falsified "clippings" (we've had that happen before). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:00, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

!!!!!!Orange Mike', please stop your cynical comments about citations. Your knwoledge of of creating purported articles need not necessarily be the same with others. If so, 'so many agencies may not be quoting, whether in this context of notability or other'. He is considered to be an expert. Let us take the point at face value. Your comment is making me think wildly that, if some body asks you to prove your self as Orange Mike., how will you prove man??? Is there any secondary or primary proof for that?? If some body says that Orange Mike should have a written source available for one to believe that he is Orange Mike!!!! what will be your reaction. If you show case your birth certificate on your website and some body links it and says this is the proof of Orange Mike, even then, would you say that 'citations from undated purported quotes from such publications which are hosted on the subject's company's own website, hence cannot be taken. Come-Off. Stewartprabha (talk) 06:21, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Orange Mike, you have stated that, you helped in improving many articles on Indian personalities, This is my request to you, to improve the article of v.v.l.n.sastry. It has all the necessary ingredients, may be presentation requires improvement. Why dont you help in doing that and add another Indian to your list.Stewartprabha (talk) 06:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * OrangeMike'''  userfy the article and help Indian's. ColinCliflaw (talk) 11:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * For a little comedy relief, I draw your attention to this biography of V.V.L.N. Sastry] from the Boston University School of Theology. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * KEEP :: I am an Indian, I got into this board having heard of discrimination on sastry's article. As an Indian from the business hub of India, Mumbai (Bombay), I can vouch for the credentials of Sastry popularly known as Dr.Sastry. He is considered in India as an Economist and Financial Analyst. The links that are provided or the press clips or magzine clips that his company's site presents are correct and notable.NgandhiInd (talk) 17:04, 22 October 2009 (UTC) — NgandhiInd (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment and Quote from myself above: "The more prominent the chorus, often the less prominent the 'star'. If there is evidence, please let us have it. Contrary to some opinions, we do not want to delete all new articles. We do want to have them fit the requirements." (This is a part of Peridon's negative campaign.) Please note that 'vouching for' Dr/Mr Sastry is no use. Sorry, but you don't count as a reliable independent source. We are not denying that "He is considered in India as an Economist and Financial Analyst.". We are saying that we need evidence of the notability that distinguishes him from the thousands of other economists and financial analysts in India and the rest of the world. That he is Indian is of no particular relevance. The origins of an economist would only be possibly considered if he/she were the only one in existence in their nation. Peridon (talk) 18:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment and Quote' from NgandhiInd: PERIDON, u are comparing Oranges with Apples.  Chorus is summuation of all voices distinctly remarking a particular thing.  Where as Star is the distinct remark of the chorus and that particular thing about whom the chorus is voicing. We all are saying one thing, when you say evidence of notability, enough number of evidences are quoted in this page itself, since the beginning of this discussion.  What else you require?. Here is a financial analyst who appears freequently on CNBC, NDTV Profit, Bloomberg UTVI the leading business channels in India on daily basis, who will take a person freequently on TV Channels unless he is popular or notable?.  Besides, He is a person freequently quoted in diversified media on various topics on economy, industry and companies.  Which media guy will quote any one in the leading business dailies?, even some where in a paragraph on daily basis?, unless you find notability or popularity or relevance of that particular person in context of the story line that a journo takes.  Why leading business magzines, profile the person, unless they find suitability of that profile in their magzines.  So when you corrobarate all the above, what else you require for justifying the notability of sastry. He has everything in his fold required for notability as the criteria for his article to continue in wikipedia.NgandhiInd (talk) 19:28, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * According to Wikipedia policy, coverage from reliable secondary sources is required to establish notability (see WP:PSTS). I should point out here that the website of Dr Sastry's company is a primary source as it is directly connected to the subject, even if it is reproducing material from other sources. This policy applies to all articles not just this one - if you take a look at some of the other articles nominated for deletion you'll see that lack of sources which comply with Wikipedia's policies is probably the most common reason for nomination. Cassandra 73 (talk) 20:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

+'''Cassandra, Appropriate sourcing can be a complicated issue, and guide lines on sources are general rules. Deciding whether primary, secondary or tertiary sources are more suitable on any given occasion is a matter of __common sense _ and good editorial judgment.ColinCliflaw (talk) 11:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC) — ColinCliflaw (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete - There is no inpdependent coverage about the subject to establish notability. Being quoted alot in this case is not an indication of notability.  -- Whpq (talk) 20:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence of notability. It appears that the subject and/or his aides trying to promote their company through Wikipedia. Salih  ( talk ) 04:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * KEEP*** I would like to know the credentials of the persons and a proof, both primary and secondary, that they are capable of passing comments titled "Delete", only then I feel that they are capable of commenting or assessig the notability of some one or else they should stop negative comments. Keep sastry's article.Stewartprabha (talk) 06:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * KEEP IT Its well linked now. The article is meeting wikipedia standardsColinCliflaw (talk) 11:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC) — ColinCliflaw (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment: This discussion is being inundated with people who may well be linked to VVLN Sastry in some way, but love the man in any event. But the question is whether he is notable.  He appears to be a business executive in India.  Claims are made that he has been profiled in "Business India" and "Fortune India," though 6 out of 12 current references in the article are not linked to any online source and the info provided in the references is sketchy.  Among the other 6 current references, 2 are to google search URLs, 2 are to firstcallequity (where he is employed), 1 is to a random quote in a Wall Street Journal article not about him, and the last is to a picture of him in a group of shots about some accounting conference in India.  So, I can't verify notability through any of that, and lean against it.  My google news archive search yields 111 hits.  Most every reference appears to be quotes from him in the context of articles discussing of market performance -- because his company does market analysis and trading stuff. I then looked at the two largest Indian papers: The archives of The Hindu give me 5 hits from 2003-08, all of the same quote variety, and I yielded no better at The Times of India archives.  There is one link in the above discussion from one of the article's supporters which leads you to an article scan posted on the firstcallindia.com website, which purports to be a one-page profile of VVLN in "Business India" -- I suspect that is not made up, but that is only thing i have seen that supports notability.--Milowent (talk) 19:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete in view of the comment above, and the problem of the Business India article only appearing on Dr Sastry's company website and therefore not being a third-party source. Cassandra 73 (talk) 22:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Dont Delete*'''Presence of another credible third party coverage Fortune India Coverage of Sastry. Fortune India coverage show cased in the website of sastry's company. With Business India coverage already linked by Ramesh and with my present link, it is more than enough to establish that Sastry is notable. Two great magzines from India covering this youngster cannot be ignored. Keep the articleLakshmisiddhi (talk) 17:21, 24 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment::: As observed by Milowent, there is another article from fortune india, the scanned version of which is appearing in the above given link.  This is another thing which supports the notabilityLakshmisiddhi (talk) 17:21, 24 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You have already presented the Fortune India source in this debate. I have already explained why coverage which we can only obtain from Dr Sastry's website cannot be used to support notability (as has Orangemike), so I'm not going to repeat myself. All of the sources provided have been considered, and the regular contributors here have explained why they are insufficient or unsuitable according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Cassandra 73 (talk) 18:04, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The-Giant-Andrew (talk) 21:43, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete - Not enough sources to establish notability. Also, the many of the more unorthodox "Keep" advocates seem fishy.--Blargh29 (talk) 22:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of sources. I'm sure the closing admin can be trusted to ignore the crapflood of "keep" non-votes from socks. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 23:30, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * comment - in all fairness, I don't think these are sockpuppets. I believe most of them are just noobs who don't understand the principles under which we operate, and are simply responding to a call for support. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  23:52, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per the lack of reliable sources. Having searched for sources on Google and Google News Archive, I could only find passing mentions that did not establish notability. Cunard (talk) 23:43, 24 October 2009 (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.