Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vaibhav Jha

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. Not notable; clear consensus DGG ( talk ) 17:42, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Vaibhav Jha[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no significant coverage by multiple independent reliable sources to meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG. It look like a promotional article. the sources are either not independent like SocialPost which accepts users articles or the subjects own university not reliable sources like tenfizz an interview with no additional coverage on the subject. Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:42, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:55, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Comment: The editors Arunzyz, Robertcarter, and Contributerdc are suspected to be the same person. Comments made on this AfD's talk page have been moved here by me. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) - 10:49, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Arunzyz (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Robertcarter (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Contributerdc (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Keep ~~per nom,~~ this article contains relevant information of technology. I think the technology on which they are working is one of the best in terms of cyber space.Although the notability of the article is less , which can be increased later on. I had heared about him a lot about his free training on digitalization and cyber awareness in rural parts of the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertcarter (talk • contribs) 07:32, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

— Robertcarter (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:52, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Vaibhav Jha Should not be deleted. Vaibhav Jha is a notable person and i think it should not be deleted as , it has a good source. It has some more Sources which will get updated in a day or two. So i request to all of you to kindly don't mark it for deletion. Thanks a lot. Contributerdc Contributerdc (talk) 01:10, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

So i suggest to KEEP Vaibhav Jha in mainspace Contributerdc (talk) 01:31, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

— Contributerdc (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Yes this article is about a notable person , who is a published Author, Trainer and Innovator. So i also suggest to KEEP Vaibhav Jha in mainspace.

Thankyou Arunzyz (talk) 01:39, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

— Arunzyz (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Comment: This statement copied over from Crystallizedcarbon's talk page.

Hi I understand about the notability of the subject is less. But it is my personal request to you not to delete this subject and kindly remove the mark from deletion of the page. As this can help many young children and entrepreneurs. He is really a talented guy who is doing a great job in educating people free of cost. He belongs from a very humble and low-middle class family, despite of all the ill circumstances he made it possible. So i request you to kindly don't make it out of the main space.

Thankyou so much Contributerdc (talk) 4:42 am, Today (UTC−4)

Delete per nom. I don't know what sources these users are talking about in the nomination page. Mark the train^Discuss 07:06, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Delete - no assertion of notability in the article, and no significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. I have cleaned up some of the most promotional text, but the notability concerns can't be fixed by editing the article. --bonadea contributions talk 09:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Delete Self published, non notable student fails WP:GNG WP:TOOSOON. Theroadislong (talk) 10:16, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Keep Neither it is self published and nor i know any of these two users.Contributerdc (talk) 10:58, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

The person is most definitely a self-published author, whose book was published through the print-on-demand platform Lulu. --bonadea contributions talk 11:44, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]

It doesn't matter the author is self published or not.At the age of 18 , child is doing this much of work and the subject is enough notable person Contributerdc (talk) 12:51, 16 September 2017 (UTC)— Contributerdc (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. []

Delete We would require in depth coverage in multiple highly reliable independent sources to consider the 18 year old author of a self published book to be notable. In this case, none of the references meets that standard. They are blogs, social media posts and announcements by his school. We do not extend leniency to biography subjects who are young, "talented" and from lower middle class families. All article subjects must meet the threshold of notability, and this one doesn't at this time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:26, 16 September 2017 (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.