From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Liz Read! Talk! 21:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

K. S. Narayan Reddy (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources found in brief WP:BEFORE search, so it fails WP:GNG. I lack the knowledge to judge whether the subject "has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline" per WP:NPROF. However, even if notability can be established by that criteria, I don't think there are sufficient sources for us to write an article that satisfies WP:V. Daask ( talk) 18:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete -- Changed !vote from above. Kazamzam convinced me to look harder at the B.C. Roy Award claim again (the website was down the first time I looked) and indeed I cannot source it outside of claims from the author. (Thanks Kazamzam!) With that gone, I don't see sufficient notability. Since I was the only "Keep" vote, I think Wcquidditch can end the relist and close as delete. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 20:54, 17 June 2024 (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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Liz Read! Talk! 21:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

K. S. Narayan Reddy (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources found in brief WP:BEFORE search, so it fails WP:GNG. I lack the knowledge to judge whether the subject "has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline" per WP:NPROF. However, even if notability can be established by that criteria, I don't think there are sufficient sources for us to write an article that satisfies WP:V. Daask ( talk) 18:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete -- Changed !vote from above. Kazamzam convinced me to look harder at the B.C. Roy Award claim again (the website was down the first time I looked) and indeed I cannot source it outside of claims from the author. (Thanks Kazamzam!) With that gone, I don't see sufficient notability. Since I was the only "Keep" vote, I think Wcquidditch can end the relist and close as delete. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 20:54, 17 June 2024 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook