Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mahesh Pathak

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. - Bobet 12:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mahesh Pathak

Very non-notable administrator, at the lowest level of the Indian Administrative Service. No claims to notability in the article or available through looking around a little.Hornplease 05:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

District collectors are certainly not the lowest level of the IAS. In fact collectos are sp,e of the most powerful positions of the IAS. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

They are neither the lowest level nor the highest level. Doctor Bruno 15:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete He is certainly the district collector of Mumbai. But it must be said, that the government's influence over public life is waning, so is the importance of district collectors. --Ageo020 05:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like to point out [1] and [2] I am not able to understand the difference between these two discussions

• Delete No claim to notability made. --Gurubrahma 06:14, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. He was quoted in a newspaper story about preparations for flooding, and mentioned in another about civil servants taking jobs in the private secyor. Being responsible for tax collection in a city the size of Mumbai is significant. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 06:19, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Do we have any other articles for tax collectors? Is NYC's tax collector given his own page? How about Mexico City's or Tokyo's? Hell, the tax collector article itself lists two- one from the Bible and one whom has been dead for 550 years. -- Kicking222 12:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

    He is not just a tax collector. He is the highest executive authority in a district. Have you read the article on district collector? =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per Gurubrahma. -- Samir धर्म 06:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Hornplease 06:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and Ageo. -- Kicking222 12:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom ST47 12:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as insufficiently notable per WP:BIO. --Satori Son 22:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nomination. Not notable. In the article about preparations for flooding, he appears as the local authority's spokesman informing about the existence of shelters, the second one mentions he has be assigend to the airport as "officer on special duty", whatever that means. He could be more important than he appears in the article due to systematic bias, but we have little else to go on. Ohconfucius 04:22, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Nichalp Doctor Bruno 15:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete no claim of notability, as above. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 10:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete The old lady up the road was once quoted in my local newspaper. That doesn't mean she should have an article. The JPS^{talk to me} 12:47, 30 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.