Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amit Singh

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 01:54, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Amit Singh

The whole article is an elaborate explanation of why some Indian philosopher was completely non-notable. And that would make it a VfD candidate even if it wasn't smelling hoaxy. From the article: His philosophies, to say the least, are considered very controversial and were never popular while he was alive. For this reason, he is not mentioned in any modern publications or web sites. Riiiight. Rl 20:39, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Perhaps you believe that it sounds hoaxy, but I can assure you that to the best of my knowledge, I am telling the truth. I added the sentence on how he is not popular because of the preface of his book (Philosophy of a Man), which talked about his unpopularity. The sentence about him not being mentioned is the result of a very long Google search that I did. If someone finds a page on him, then I urge them to remove the part about him not being mentioned. Retroactive 21:11, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Retroactive, please cite your sources. We need more references here. For example, where was this 1967 interview published. And where can we find information on Philosophy of a Man. Zzyzx11 21:55, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • The only source I have is a very old copy of Philosophy of a Man. I asked my father, who had it, where it was from, and he can't remember. Many of the pages are missing from this book, including the title page, so I cannot determine which company published it. A search of the Internet, which I performed, found no relevant results as to this book and the author. This can be seen in the portion of the article where I wrote that Amit Singh did not appear on the web or in any modern publications. However, my information about the 1967 interview and the rest of the article comes from the battered copy of his book that I have. I am sorry that I cannot be of much help to others in verifying the truth of my statements apart from saying that they are true. If the lack of easily accessible information makes my article moot, then I urge you to delete it. Retroactive 22:21, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • Scans or photos would be helpful - David Gerard 01:48, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I can't find Amit Singh in the correct context anywhere on Google, and none of Amazon.com, the Harvard University Hollis catalog, nor the University of Toronto library catalog list either Philosophy of a Man or Ek manus. Furthermore, there is a web page about philosophy here, and its author is—though an interesting coincidence—named Amit Singh. -- TenOfAllTrades | Talk 02:21, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • I shouldn't be too hasty—as David Gerard says, some scans or photos would be very helpful and persuasive. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 02:21, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Possible hoax aside, the article itself confirms his complete lack of notability. He wrote one book that had "terrible sales," and he "did not hold any position in life nor gain any prestige." GeorgeStepanek\^talk 03:17, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, smells hoaxy. Megan1967 03:47, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. This may sound strange coming from the author of the article, but I believe it should be deleted. As many have pointed out, Singh was not at all notable, so it wouldn't make much sense to include him in a Wikipedia article. Secondly, I can't scan or photograph the book because I don't have a scanner or digital camera, so there is no way for others to verify its existence. Third of all, TenOfAllTrades has pointed out the lack of the book in any database on the Internet. Either the book I have contains completely false information (as it doesn't appear on any of these sites or databases) or it is not notable to that extent. Either way, it should be deleted in favor of articles with more useful content. To finish, I saw the other website of philosophy. That, to the best of my knowledge, is just a coincidence. The Singh book that I have says that he is dead, so how could he run a web page? Retroactive 04:50, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • One of the criteria for Speedy Delete is "Any page which is requested for deletion by the original author, provided the author reasonably explains that it was created by mistake, and the page was edited only by its author." I believe this may now apply. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 08:11, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure if it would fit under the Speedy Deletion criteria, seeing as I intended to create the article. However, the comments of many posted here have caused me to doubt the legitimacy of the book. Therefore, I say that it should be deleted. Retroactive 13:52, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:20, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep because of Philosophy of a Man, but needs to be extensively pruned and reworked. --Daniel C. Boyer 21:32, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • I'd feel a lot better about Philosophy of a Man if we had some more information about it--some sort of independent corroboration of its existence, and that it's under the correct title. The Library of Congress doesn't have a listing for it, or for Amit Singh either. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 17:10, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, concur with GeorgeStephanek. Radiant! 14:10, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.