Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chakolath Ramachandran

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. Wizardman 17:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chakolath Ramachandran

Chakolath Ramachandran (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

The main author of this page asked for it to be deleted under G7, but there have been some contributions from IPs and it's not a usual case of G7, having been around for over 15 months. I'm more inclined to take the matter here. Weak delete as the page seems to fall slightly short of WP:BIO. Stifle (talk) 10:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete I am the only contributor.If you look at the history, you'll find that all major edits are by me and my dynamic IP's and the other changes are all trivial or vandalism.Reasons:

  • Notability.
  • COI, as i am the man's grandson.(You can see that from this bit of vandalism by a cousin of mine), and there was a definite NPOV,as I learnt when I got a little more experienced as an editor. Amog |Talk 10:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Apparently a Chairman (ceo) of several major development companies in India. That's notable. Among the contribution oft he other authors was removing some of the peacock terms Amog had added.There's some recent ip vandalism, but that's no reason to delete the article. DGG (talk) 11:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 17:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak delete No independent sources verifying notability (the subject is not the focus of the main reference). --Regents Park (Feed my swans) 10:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as per WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:BIO1E. A lot of IAS officers in India serve as CEOs/Chairmen of a lot of public sector companies. Most of them aren't even famous in any way. Does that mean we can afford to have articles on all such people? In this particular case, the article's subject is famous only on the basis of the case against him, from which he had been acquitted, so speaks rohith. 18:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


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.