Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Venkatesh Rao (writer)


 * 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. ✗ plicit  13:30, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Venkatesh Rao (writer)

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

Tagged for notability since 2018. The only cited RS are a Vox article and a Guardian article which merely have passing mentions referencing Rao's blog. A search for other sources failed to produce additional significant RS coverage. This subject fails notability guidelines. Freelance-frank (talk) 00:41, 5 March 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  02:20, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, India,  and California.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:23, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm unclear if a WP:BEFORE was done here but my own does not change the conclusion. The coverage of this writer does not demonstrate significant independent coverage of the author or their works. The coverage that is significant is either not independent or not reliable and vice-versa. No readily-apparent WP:ATD presents itself. Eggishorn  (talk) (contrib) 21:37, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * His fascinating and consistently insightful posts have been discussed quite a lot in various books and by other writers, arguably enough for NAUTHOR #1 & #2, as these searches shows. But a couple of low-effort book reviews in some city color supplement of The Hindu or some WP:ADMASQ "articles" in Times of India on book launches would get a dull writer enough WP notability, while posts about vgr's writing like these -, - would (correctly per WP:RS) be disputed as blog posts. And of course, he's already tweeted about this aspect of attention mechanics. Reminds me of two recent AfDs where obviously unencyclopedic entries weren't deleted due to the loopholes in Notability rules. This could be the other-side-of-that-coin case, where something that should be retained gets deleted. I'm not going to vote though, since he's said the page is "awful and should be deleted" and I don't know how to make it better. Hemantha (talk) 13:51, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - article fails WP:GNG very little material can be found online about the subject PastaMonk 14:25, 14 March 2022 (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.