Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saumitra Rawat

Saumitra Rawat

[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)

Very likely a paid-for article or at least heavy UPE involvement post-creation. I won't PROD or speedy because the subject might be notable so it's worth a debate but the sourcing in the article as stands is paper thin and the article is essentially a CV in prose format. There are a few rock-solid reliable sources cited but they don't appear to say anything much about this gentleman. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:33, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and India. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:33, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in light of near-certain paid editing, WP:NEWSORGINDIA is particularly concerning for me. I would not be surprised if many of the sources are themselves paid, which would render the sourcing ineligible for GNG consideration. Good day—RetroCosmos ^talk 13:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This article fails WP:GNG with mostly unreliable sources and the ones that we could consider somewhat reliable does not show any significant coverage about the subject. RangersRus (talk) 13:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. This article was created by me as a part of my efforts to create articles on Padma Award winners of India. The subject of this article is a recipient of Padma Shri, the fourth highest civilian hour of a country with a population of 1.4 billion. It is up to people like User:RetroCosmos to believe that this is paid editing but before reaching to such a conclusion, I would advise anyone to check on my Wiki history. I believe Padma Shri gives the subject notability per WP:ANYBIO. If the article needs pruning to remove dubious references, that may be looked into. --jojo@nthony (talk) 14:16, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not accusing you in particular of paid editing. I thoroughly checked the article history before creating an SPI report, and (on a quick glance) did not believe you to be a sockpuppet. However, this is Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Good day—RetroCosmos ^talk 14:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment was a sweeping one and, being the creator and major contributor of the article, I felt the accusation points towards me. If it is otherwise, sorry, it's my mistake, I must have failed to grasp the real content. jojo@nthony (talk) 14:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]