Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajinder Gupta

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. asilvering (talk) 06:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rajinder Gupta

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely promotional article, paid contribs and the company he founded doesn't even have it's own article so there's no use having his. If some one searches his company's name this article doesn't pop up. The article has total 1500 views and is a stub from 10 yrs ago _saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs^⚔ 09:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Finance, and Business. _saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs^⚔ 09:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Punjab-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:40, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. From my observation, the article is not at all promotional and adheres to WP:NPOV. The article also has multiple reliable sources and thus passes WP:BIO. The absence of an article of the company he established is not a reason to delete this page. Same goes with the pageviews and class of the article. Warriorglance(talk to me) 11:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Three sources are generic profiles and don't provide in-depth coverage of the subject, and the final one just links to the most recent issue of Hindustan Times. All sources I could find online are, if anything, about Trident Group more than Gupta. Cortador (talk) 11:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: The Padma Shri award seems notable. There is a limited amount of sourcing that confirms the win. [1] is typical of more recent coverage tha feels promotional. Also come coverage about the cricket association [2]. Oaktree b (talk) 13:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. No consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- From my point of view, the person is presumed notable since he has received a award by Govt. Of India as per WP:ANYBIO, by searching him, I found that their are multiple reliable sources with significant coverage on subject which confirms it's notablity. Since, we are discussing on person not on its organization, so it's not a valid point to delete as his established company doesn't have a article. VortexPhantom🔥 (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is made up nonsense. It is a WP:BLP and it needs signficant WP:SECONDARY coverage to prove the person is notable. scope_creep^Talk 03:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: would still benefit from a bit more input
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 09:31, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The style of writing shows an introductory style which a subject recieves at some interview or advertisement per WP:COI and WP:NPOV. The reason for Weak Keep is an award by a national government which is a verified claim. There are some mentions in sources about work as well as for him being awarded and some passable mentions in news articles which are more specifically about the company or group whatever it may be. HilssaMansen19 (talk) 16:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I think there is some coverage for notability here. I did find a few other articles [3], [4] Ramos1990 (talk) 00:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ramos1990: Why are posting a medium link as evidence of notabilty when its not a reliable source? scope_creep^Talk 03:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I found several other news articles where there is some significant coverage about him. Fade258 (talk) 01:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is no coverage here. 3 above is non-rs, 4 is routine annoucement. A before on this find nothing of worth. The award is insufficient to establish notability on its own per consensus. It needs more and its not there. scope_creep^Talk 03:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - They've won a Padma Siri award which passes WP:ANYBIO but the award alone doesn't guarantee notability. There is not enough significance sources only about the person. Editz2341231 (talk) 21:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - We may well be headed towards no consensus, but in my opinion the keeps here are misplaced. The sourcing for the individual vice the company is all routine, shallow-depth, non-RS material. While not a policy page, I encourage any editors who do not read the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to see WP:NEWSORGINDIA; it was written for just this type of case. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 01:27, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no reliable sources containing sigcov have been presented here, and none seem likely to emerge. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 05:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.