Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chikki Panday

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. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chikki Panday

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

non-notable User4edits (talk) 10:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, India, and Maharashtra. User4edits (talk) 10:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't think this is the same perso:n www.opindia.com/2021/11/mumbai-police-summons-chikki-brother-of-chunky-panday-ncb-aryan-khan-drug-case/, which is a blacklisted spam site here. I see nothing for this businessman we'd use for sourcing; nothing at all that I can find to be honest. Oaktree b (talk) 21:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A quick Google News search for Chikki Panday and चिक्की पांडे (in Hindi) has yielded a substantial number of articles. A new section has been added, accompanied by some sources, and additional citations will be appended soon. Also, yes this is the same person mentioned in the link you shared above so the subject satisfies the notability criteria outlined in WP:GNG. 1.23.250.87 (talk) 07:25, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does not establish NBIO or pass GNG. User4edits (talk) 12:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Brother of a famous actor" isn't notable. Had he not been summoned by police, he'd still be a non-notable businessman. Oaktree b (talk) 16:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Receiving "significant coverage" in multiple reliable sources, as emphasized in my vote above, aligns with the WP:GNG standard. WP:SIG specifies that "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. I have cited two additional sources to further substantiate the content and will continue to augment the references for a comprehensive overview. 1.23.251.79 (talk) 16:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: WP:INVALIDBIO WP:BIOFAMILY User4edits (talk) 16:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FYI the article is not based on WP:INVALIDBIO or WP:BIOFAMILY and it appears there might be an oversight in reviewing the WP:GNG guidelines, which specify that A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I also must point out that in this edit, you removed two of his official positions in a central government institution without any valid reason. Furthermore, attempting to suggest that the article is based on an WP:INVALIDBIO or WP:BIOFAMILY biography is not accurate. 1.23.251.79 (talk) 17:29, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Saying an appointment in a committee of MTNL, that too only a specific region of Mumbai is equivalent to a committee of Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (India) is absurd, and so is being named as a member for representing one out of 28 states in 2008 (16 years ago). Both are misleading and appear advertising. Nonetheless, the subject is not notable, and will be dealt as per this DR, I see you've undone my edit, best of luck. I don't own anything here. User4edits (talk) 18:52, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (spout) 17:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'Week Keep -- Tinu Cherian - 13:53, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per @Oaktree b and @User4edits, no notability Tehonk (talk) 22:13, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject has substantial coverage in various reputable sources aligning with the criteria outlined in both GNG and BASIC. As per these guidelines individuals are considered notable if they have received significant coverage from multiple secondary sources that are reliable, independent and unaffiliated with the subject. Furthermore it's emphasized that even if the coverage in any single source may not be extensive the aggregation of multiple independent sources suffices to establish notability. Given the presence of multiple sourced materials within the article the subject in question unequivocally meets the criteria stipulated by these policies to affirm notability.- FitIndia ^{Talk (Admin on Commons)} 02:45, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's worth noting that an analysis of pageviews for the article reveals consistent engagement with significant monthly views since its inception. Notably in 2015 the article garnered nearly a million views on two separate occasions. While pageviews alone do not establish notability this observation underscores the level of interest and attention garnered by the subject. Although unrelated to the notability policies it serves as an additional testament to the subject's relevance and public interest. - FitIndia ^{Talk (Admin on Commons)} 03:51, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 February 17, BADNAC speedy overturned.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:34, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: In addition to my above comment 18:52, 5 February 2024 -- 1.23.251.79 appears to be a WP:SPA familiar with WP:POLICIES but contributions only to save this DR and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deanne Pandey (Both Pandey/Panday are married) See Special:Contributions/1.23.251.79 Thanks,

User4edits (talk) 05:57, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which is a red flag, not helping the deletion request. Oaktree b (talk) 21:19, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per Fitindia above. The subject has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources and passes WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. GSS ^💬 07:42, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be helpful if keep voters highlighted the sources they believe show notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The subject seems notable to me based on the sources provided. I performed a quick search on the subject and there appears to be some level of notability passing GNG. Mevoelo (talk)

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.