Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K. R. Kaushik

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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 11:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] K. R. Kaushik

Subject non notable. Is a Bureaucrat and not a politician with no significant achievement Doctor Bruno 19:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• Strong keep - The subject of the artcle (police commissioner of Ahmedabad) meets requirements of WP:BIO - Major local political figures who receive (or received) significant press coverage. A google search on K R Kaushik + Ahmedabad will give you hundreds of hits from most of the newspapers of India. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 19:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• No vote yet A police commissioner in a city of 5 million people probably gets lots of press. Does anyone care to research this and flesh it out into a full article? Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - The article has a lot of scope for expansion like all other articles at Category:Ahmedabad. I am the creator of these articles and maintain most of them. But currently I am busy with Ahmedabad and its FAC which was the reason why these articles were created. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 19:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Chief of Police in a large city is a notable person. Article is a stub, but that's not a criterion for deletion. It's a criterion for expansion. Bureacrat/Politician is a fine line, and regardless of how much nothing they accomplish, Goveners General are all notable, for example. WilyD 19:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - I am curious as to why the {{afdnewbies}} tag was added to this AfD. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 19:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • That's been bugging me as well, especially since it was added before a single comment was made. WilyD 19:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
    • That does seem odd. The only time I'd ever consider adding the tag right off the bat is when nominating an article on a forum, since we know the socks always show up on those. Fan-1967 22:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Just as a note, though it has never been codified in WP:BIO, there are quite a few police commissioner articles in Wikipedia, and one could probably make a very strong case for systemic bias if this were deleted. I cannot vote keep as this is article has no sourcing, thus fails WP:V (and I've tagged it as such and WP:BIO. I imagine this could probably be sourced rather easily... but should be deleted if it is not.--Isotope23 20:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

  Comment - I have added proper references to the article. It meets WP:V now. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 12:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

  Comment, thanks for sourcing this.--Isotope23 12:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep I've added a reference and dob --RMHED 23:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep The IPS officer is incharge of a large city and thus quite notable. For all of you wondering what's going on with three articles from Ahmedabad being nominated for deletion in one go, and Afdnewbies added to the discussion before even one vote is cast, there is a reason in recent past: the nominator's own article was put up for AfD - have a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mariano_Anto_Bruno_Mascarenhas forgot to sign - EyeMD 02:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - please WP:AGF - there is not need for such alarm at this stage. If indeed true, it is minor at this time and best to let the tension fade away. As you can see there is no danger of the article being deleted.Blnguyen | rant-line 02:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep meets notability requirements. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 04:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:BIO. Per EyeMD, possible bad faith nomination: Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. -AED 16:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep top police officer of a large city, where there have been unrest recently.Blnguyen | rant-line 02:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Definitely notable. --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 08:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep – nom in bad faith. =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:02, 12 August 2006 (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.