Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inglish Maker

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 speedy delete. WP:SNOW applies here. ... discospinster _talk 20:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inglish Maker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Contested draftify - in my view, this would not pass WP:AfC. The three sources cited are nearly identical in terms of content despite being hosted on different websites. All are written by 'Digital Desk' rather than professional journalists. Furthermore, not even one of them shows significant coverage of Inglish Maker.

Nothing in my WP:BEFORE search shows strong coverage either so I believe that this fails WP:GNG. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:50, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:51, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:51, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:51, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – borderline speedy deletion case. No secondary sources, the three sources that were in the article were based on the same press release, so I have removed two of them. Very clear that the person is not notable, and is trying to use Wikipedia as a marketing platform; doing charitable work and raising money for flood victims does not make a person notable if independent sources do not write about it. --bonadea contributions talk 11:59, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I moved this to draft but the creator has some other wish. This page is far away from notability also a case of CSD G11, the way it was written.Sonofstar (talk) 12:18, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Nowhere near meeting notability criteria. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 15:16, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not notable. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 16:43, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: vloggers have a higher mountain to climb for notability, I dare say. No GNG met here. --Whiteguru (talk) 20:26, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.