Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vishwas Mudagal


 * 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. (WP:NPASR). (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica1000 11:04, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Vishwas Mudagal

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only has written 1 book so far which does not even have a page on here. Seems to be too early for this guy as of now if ever. Wgolf (talk) 02:57, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Not notable. Fails WP:BASIC. Harsh (talk)  17:42, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔  04:38, 1 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. The Hindu article is entirely about this author and his book. Candleabracadabra (talk) 14:43, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment-Was it a major book or something? Granted I'm not Hindu or Indian so I am not sure about that-so yeah was it? (I've seen odder ones get tagged from people nominated for an Oscar to even someone that might of been in the Olympics but was nowhere near getting a medal! Just being nominated in any category at the Oscars or being in the Olympics is good enough for a page IMO) Wgolf (talk) 16:03, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The book and author have received substantial coverage. In addition to the article in the Hindu and other articles already cited there'scoverage such as this. I don't think Olympic athletes should automatically be notable and I think that's changing. Nominations for awards are not enough in and of themselves. I think substantial coverage in reliable independent sources is really the key. Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil (speak to me) 07:37, 11 May 2014 (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.