Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ravieshwar Singh

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. With discounting of the sockpuppet arguments, this discussion has a clear consensus to delete. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:10, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ravieshwar Singh

[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)

Doesn't meet WP:GNG. It's just the blatant non adherence to the reviewer's comment/decline reason by the page creator/submitter. If we are considering the sources, they are mostly WP:SELFPUB. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Businesspeople, Entertainment, Fashion, and United States of America. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Law, India, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not notable, self-published sourcing, and editor has not taken into account advice. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 05:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - editor corrected TV Guide link, author published through reputable sources (not blogs), many citations to his work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B837:8C03:E011:E929:8629:EFF (talk) 16:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not notable. If it is kept then "Rgs21" should clarify if they have any link to Ravi Guru Singh, the nickname of the article subject. Ttwaring (talk) 17:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - substantively this page has more citations and support than many other notability pages. Rgs21 may be on vacation or unavailable and the page should not hinge on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.114.12 (talk) 15:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - almost entirely self-published sources. A lawyer or writer is famous for writing; they are not notable for that. One can make yourself famous; to become notable requires other people writing about you. See WP:GNG. Bearian (talk) 08:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I reviewed, the people writing about the subject include Marc Bain at the Business of Fashion (extensively), Divya Bhandari at the Hindu (extensively -- on the digital fashion and the future for India) -- articles are behind paywalls. To a lesser extent, the subject is written about and cited in other law.com articles on decentralized autonomous organizations, by the author Robert Schwinger, a prominent partner at Norton Rose Fulbright, an elite law firm. The Business of Fashion and the Hindu, are credible, reputable and independent sources. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.85.105.72 (talk) 15:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - maybe this is raising WP:ASPERSIONs, but why would a bunch of random IP addresses be commenting on an AFD of a minor digital fashion lawyer? Bluethricecreamman (talk) 19:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PANICVOTE if this is what I think it is. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 19:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calling out ducks is not casting aspersions.--CNMall41 (talk) 04:31, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Mentions and self-pubs do not equal significant coverage. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:31, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - That's some, not all references. Nyangaman4 (talk) 06:09, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then point out the others. You have failed to do so as of yet. Also, with only 65 edits and not editing Wikipedia in over a year, I am curious what brought you to this specific AfD discussion. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:02, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did 5 accounts with less than 100 edits all suddenly comment on this after I pointed out WP:PANICVOTE? Bluethricecreamman (talk) 01:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluethricecreamman:, based on the results of this SPI, you can probably strike the keep votes of confirmed socks. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given the SPI, counting off at least 4-5 keep votes. Thank you for your hard work in reviewing :) 74.101.99.164 (talk) 02:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - Regardless of whether the voting above is in fact WP:PANIC or not, the article for Ravieshwar Singh is well sourced, with about two dozen citations. Vogue (magazine), Elle (magazine), TV Guide Magazine, the Huffington Post, and other high-traffic, top-tier online magazines are all cited. Definitely not a notability fail since this meets WP:SIGCOV. Nyangaman4 (talk) 06:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
passing refs and interviews cannot establish notability Bluethricecreamman (talk) 13:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The article is well-sourced and he has extensive coverage in reputable outlets like Vogue and Elle, demonstrating clear notability per WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Licatatom (talk • contribs) 17:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The subject is recognized in high-profile publications, has substantial coverage that compiles with Wikipedia's notability criteria. Toopus (talk) 18:29, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – He meets the criteria of WP:GNG due to significant coverage in reliable, independent sources such as Business of Fashion, Vogue, Elle, The Times of India, and The Hindu. These outlets provide in-depth coverage of his contributions in digital fashion, AI activism, and law. He also meets notability in the "Others" category with his media appearances in a Netflix show, his role in a documentary at the Cleveland International Film Festival, and his work in legal publications. DominicJoshua (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep – For reasons stated above, this is GNG. Added additional coverage.

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.