Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Venkanna H. Naik (2nd nomination)


 * 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. "looks funny and lack of citations make it seem like a fabricated folklore" is not a reason to delete, editing can sort that out - and there are references provided even if they are not inline. With the exception of that comment, the arguments seem pretty much equal, and as such I am closing this as no consensus, but without prejudice against a future renomination  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 01:03, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Venkanna H. Naik
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Looks like this is someone's personal interest, neither his educational qulifications nor his positions qualifie for wikipedia notability. There are out there so many Commissioners in India. He did not have the right qualifications such as IAS or ICS government degrees required for the commissioner's position. This page is there with no merits. Sorry we need to clean up many such pages. 0ukieu (talk) 15:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 10:19, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Comment on the 1st nomination: There are out there several thousands of people with such positions in India. The polulation is not critical to judge. Every State has at least on an avarage 200-400 disritcts in India. There are more than 20 States in India and there are more than 1 commissioners in each district. Indian villages are thickly populated. VH Naik as such has no publications. Yes, we have to respect his age and he is no more. But that should not be the criteria to judge. Someone in the family struggled to put up this page - Sorry. --0ukieu (talk) 12:18, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete seems like a typical indian civil servant from the Raj era. Fails our notability standards - negligible independent coverage. There are also concerns of COI editing by family members. (and BTW, at-par, indian states don't have 200-400 districts; the number is more like 30-40, even UP has only around 70. And this was in raj era and entire provinces had only 20 or so districts each then).--Sodabottle (talk) 05:04, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

--0ukieu (talk) 10:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete looks funny and lack of citations make it seem like a fabricated folklore. Haribhagirath (talk) 04:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep No matter how many provinces there are in India, the DC of every one of them is notable as the principal government official of the district, which is thea major political subdivision under the province.    We're an encyclopedia  and NOT PAPER.    DGG ( talk ) 05:35, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment This is not fair at other similar/commissioners who were deleted. Which criteria are you referring to from Wikipedia notability? Not all commisioners are district heads. Some are officers in charge of some departments. Thanks.--0ukieu (talk) 18:09, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per my comments in the first deletion discussion. The fact that India is a large country with many districts in no way diminishes the notability of district collectors, each of whom is/was responsible for the administration of a large population. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:20, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Passing IAS is much more superior than having this position you are taking about. Naik did not pass IAS at all. In fact, i doubt he was a commissioner or he was fit to become a commissioner. Wikipedia has deleted so many commissioners with a IAS. There is no consistence how wikpedia works. Read what Sodabottle wrote above. Please stick to the notability criteria establsihed and point to it your discussions. If we donot justifiy, Wikipedia may eventually become a folder holding huge number of junk stuff.--0ukieu (talk) 14:05, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. According to its article the Indian Administrative Service was established in 1946, 17 years after this subject's death, so how can its exams possibly have any relevance to his notability? I don't know when the title "district collector" was changed to "commissioner" in the article, but during the last AfD I added a reliable source to confirm that he was district collector and further confirmation can be found here, here and here. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:08, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Whether he was a commisioner or not is not the point. Why did wiki treat others differently who were more qualified than (having passed IAS) than VH Naik? They were removed without justification. Have a fair opinion - point to the wiki notability criteria that are set and point to it EXACTLY. Was ICS there then? Did he pass? Thanks.--0ukieu (talk) 23:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This discussion is about Naik, not those others that you keep going on about who have had their articles deleted, and why don't you point EXACTLY to any notability guideline that says or implies that passing an examination has any connection whatsoever to notability? Phil Bridger (talk) 07:35, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * "Comment we are simply biased in our discussions, so is wikipedia. You check yourself WP:PROF, you have been an admin for wiki - It is simple, they do not qualify, so do Naik's page, period. Thanks.--0ukieu (talk) 11:38, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

--0ukieu (talk) 10:45, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Once again you are putting forward totally irrelevant arguments. No claim of notability as an academic has been made, so why invoke WP:PROF? And if you must keep banging on about other articles that have been deleted could you please provide links to the deletion discussions? Phil Bridger (talk) 13:08, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * comment - I meant WP:BIO. You are talking as if you are in court e.g. I said that then..., I'll continue..--. I donot remeber the articles, but I was involved in them. I ask you to check them - you have all the tools available0ukieu (talk) 13:26, 23 May 2011 (UTC)--0ukieu (talk) 13:45, 23 May 2011 (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.