Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Karnataka

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Karnataka. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Karnataka|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Karnataka. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to India.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Articles for deletion

edit

Chidananda S Naik

edit
AfDs for this article:
Chidananda S Naik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

not notable enough, looks like a promotion. KnightMight (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. KnightMight (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 18:04, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Wow, you broke your 2-year hiatus just to renominate an article that was already closed as keep only five days ago? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 18:06, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Please note that AfD is not about editors’ motives but about article content and sourcing. A prior discussion doesn’t preclude renomination if notability concerns remain (see WP:DELAFTER). The key issue is whether the subject meets WP:GNG as an individual filmmaker. Current sourcing appears limited to coverage of a single award-winning short film, which may establish notability of the film, but not necessarily the filmmaker. This discussion is focused only on that question.
    Also, much of the coverage appears routine, centered on the film’s awards, and the article’s tone gives the impression of promotional editing, raising concern about WP:NOTPROMO. KnightMight (talk) 18:25, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This is what happens when you rely on AI to generate your response. Is WP:DELAFTER a policy you just created?
    A prior discussion doesn’t preclude renomination if notability concerns remain - If you had genuine notability concerns, you should have followed WP:6MONTHS, which clearly states: If the XfD discussion was closed as “keep”, generally do not renominate the page for at least six months, unless there is something new to say, and even so, usually wait a few months. Your nomination rationale doesn’t add anything new to the discussion. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:44, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The subject’s notability rests almost entirely on a single short film, Sunflowers Were the First Ones to Know..., which already has its own article. Coverage of the filmmaker is limited to routine reporting of the film’s festival awards and screenings. Even the widely cited Rajamouli's tweet is simply a congratulatory remark tied to the award, not in-depth coverage of the individual’s career. Cinefondation a.k.a La Cinéf (not to be confused with Compétition de courts métrages) a student competition, a sidebar section for film students. Recognition there demonstrates the film’s success, not necessarily that the filmmaker has established a notable career. Per WP:GNG, WP:TOOSOON, and WP:NOTPROMO, this establishes notability of the film, but not of the filmmaker as a standalone subject. KnightMight (talk) 09:05, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep: Per WP:SKCRIT#2. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:12, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IViz Security

edit
IViz Security (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contains unreferenced/promotional content Schtiapht (talk) 11:29, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Avinaash V. Rai

edit
AfDs for this article:
Avinaash V. Rai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant independent coverage to justify a standalone article. - The9Man Talk 10:50, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kannada News Today

edit
Kannada News Today (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another article with paid-for WP:NEWSORGINDIA sources and other puff pieces. If all of them are excluded, easily fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Moved out of draftspace by a new editor. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 16:25, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The subject Kannada News Today meets the general notability guideline as it has received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Over the past months, the article has been consistently improved with verifiable references from established media, addressing concerns of reliability and neutrality.

The topic is a registered and notable news organization, and multiple third-party sources provide substantial coverage that goes beyond trivial mentions, satisfying the requirements of notability for organizations.

Any remaining issues regarding tone or sourcing can be addressed through normal editing rather than deletion, per WP:IMPROVEIT. Deletion would remove encyclopedic content that is verifiably notable and of relevance. Moulyags (talk) 17:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC) *Keep – The subject meets WP:GNG and WP:ORG as it has received significant, independent coverage in reliable news outlets including The Times of India, Free Press Journal, Mid-Day, and Ahmedabad Mirror. It is a notable regional digital news platform in Karnataka, founded by an award-winning journalist, and has been recognized with regional awards. The article is verifiable with multiple independent sources and contributes to coverage of regional media in India, consistent with articles on other digital media outlets.Arman Shaquille Qio (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:07, 15 August 2025 (UTC) — Arman Shaquille Qio (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Blocked SOCK[reply]

  • They are obviously paid press releases, see WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 16:28, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The majority of the given sources are press releases. Zuck28 (talk) 08:16, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Zuck28 Thank you for your feedback. May I kindly ask in which angle you are 100% sure that the majority of the sources are press releases? For example, one of the references is regarding an MLA candidate recently taking charge, which is cited from an official government link along with an NDTV election report, as well as an additional third-party source.
    I truly want to understand how you are identifying them as press releases, so that I can learn and contribute more accurately. As you mentioned, if the concern is mainly about the reliability of sources, I am open to improving the citations with stronger third-party coverage.
    From my understanding, the topic is not only based on press announcements. The recognition received as a journalist and the establishment of an organization were covered in independent reporting as well. If I have missed better references or failed to present them properly, I am more than willing to correct that.
    I genuinely appreciate guidance here, as my goal is to contribute in line with Wikipedia’s sourcing standards and not to create any issues. Moulyags (talk) 09:32, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – The subject adds encyclopedic value as a notable regional news platform in Karnataka. Its independent coverage in multiple reliable sources and recognition with awards establish notability and verifiability under WP:GNG. Nira Omega (talk) 14:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC) — Nira Omega (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It looks like this AfD is the target of canvassing. To limit that, I am EC-protecting the AfD. Hoping to get more views from experienced AfD regulars.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:12, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably Delete - due to the well-known issues with Indian media, it is hard to know which are and which are not sources that just regurgitate press releases on topics like this. So ignoring the newspapers, it seems to me that the strongest source is an award by a press association/club. Which itself seems to be in a very small category in a region of India. I could be wrong but I think we'd need to see stronger sources to show that this is a wiki-notable media org. JMWt (talk) 20:07, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 21:29, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete:
Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
  No byline ~   ✘ No
  SEO service provided by virtuopress.com     ✘ No
  FPJ Web Desk - possibly a press release   ✘ No
  ST Webdesk   ✘ No
  Blog ✘ No
  Buzzfeed article ✘ No
  Loktej English Team   ✘ No
  No byline ✘ No
  Blog ✘ No
  Blog ✘ No
  Blog ✘ No
  Loktej English Team ✘ No
  Blog ✘ No
  Not about subject ✘ No
  AI news article ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Per above analysis, fails GNG. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:23, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Karnataka&oldid=1308700399"