Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prashanth Nair (IAS)

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. Once the socks are discarded, there is a consensus to delete. I did consider draftification but given the previous history of sockpuppetry and persistent recreation of the article after AfD deletions, I have decided not to do this. Black Kite (talk) 12:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Prashanth Nair (IAS)

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

Prashanth Nair (IAS) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject is only getting some incidental coverage for a programme he initiated. Does not have enougj significant coverage from the sources. Fails GNG. Its better we merge it with Operation Sulaimani Kichu🐘 Need any help? 10:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 10:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 10:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 10:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Collapsing WP:IDONTLIKETHENOMINATOR discussion --Beccaynr (talk) 16:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Comment It appears that this AfD may have been created in bad faith. See this statement at ANI where editor Kashmorwiki/Kichu, who nominated this AfD writes:
"Inorder to make sure Im right, I set something like a honeytrap by opening these two deletion discussions Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Divya S. Iyer and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prashanth Nair (IAS)"
Appparently this article was nominated for AfD as part of some broader plot to "trap" the article's creator based on the belief that they were a sockpuppet. I would strongly recommend that this AfD needs tk be closed with prejudice as it was not nominated in good faith. I suppose that a Speedy Keep would not be possible since there was a Delete vote, unfortunately. Kashmorwiki/Kichu may wish to refrain from nominating any more AfDs for a long time, as this is incredibly inappropriate. Hyperion35 (talk) 03:04, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have reviewed the pending ANI and the concluded SPI, and particularly in light of Kichu's history as an editor and participation in this discussion, I feel that these AfDs are brought in good faith due to genuine concerns about whether the articles meet Wikipedia guidelines. Beccaynr (talk) 03:36, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hyperion35, setting the honey trap was only the other side of the coin. When this same user came to with this same draftz previously, I declined it. So this is not only honeytrap. This article deserves AFD nomination. So are you saying that this is a well written article. The creator of this article has been warned twice for paid editing. We need to consider all that factors. So this is not at all bad faith. I have no intention of making this project disruptive. My edit history itself will prove that. And 80 percent of my opinions in AFD's were in favour of my comments. And you can see that most of the articles I nominated has been deleted (75 percent) . [3]). Finally my doubt has been confirmed. 7 accounts has been blocked for sockpuppetry including the creator of this article itself. [4]. So if I havent set this honeytrap which you said I did in bad faith, I would not have been able to provide evidence. Regards. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 04:54, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kashmorwiki, I had a public policy professor, back in college, who would respond to any policy proposal that referenced an irrelevant point by asking "and what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?", to emphasize that we had not properly addressed some salient issue. My point is that reading through your response, I am finding myself asking the same question. Whether another editor was or was not using sockpuppets, whether 75% or 0% of your AfD noms are deleted, whether this AfD helped you catch a sockpuppet, all of this is irrelevant, what does it have to do with the price of tea in China? Or more specifically, what does it have to do with this AfD? Please see Point for guidance about why we should not engage in disruptive editing to prove a point, which you appear to admit in the final line of your comment, where you claim that nominating this AfD was the only way to catch a suspected sockpuppet.
As for this specific AfD, I have not decided to vote either way. I have no strong feelings for or against. As a career civil servant myself, I question whether the job is likely to result in notability. On the other hand, I am not familiar with the Indian civil service system, which may be sufficiently different from the American system that my experience is not directly relevant. I was leaning towards voting Delete, since this subject lacks one key component that made a similar subject appear notable, but now I do not feel comfortable voting, and I do not feel that I can do so in good faith, if this AfD was proposed for the very reasons that you claim. Please strongly consider retracting both AfDs and renominating, as a show of good faith. If you do so, I might consider voting Delete on this article, but as I said, I cannot do so in good conscience on this AfD, as I feel it has been tainted by an improper purpose. Hyperion35 (talk) 12:03, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To clarify my comment above with regard to the WP:POINT guideline, and specifically the section WP:NOTPOINTy,just because someone is making a point does not mean that they are disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate that point. As a rule, editors engaging in "POINTy" behavior are making edits with which they do not actually agree, for the deliberate purpose of drawing attention and provoking opposition in the hopes of making other editors see their "point". I do not believe there is any basis to conclude that these AfDs were only brought to illustrate a point, or that there is no basis upon which to have a thorough discussion about how to interpret the notability guidelines. And I do think that an editor's history is one factor to consider in making this determination, but not the only one; but I do believe that Kichu's disclosure of the background issue here and their history generally provides additional support for an assumption of good faith with the AfDs, even though they were otherwise trying to protect Wikipedia. Beccaynr (talk) 12:39, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hyperion35, I think your concern is that me saying that this is a honeytrap. But I already told you, I already had plan of nominating this article because the exact copy of this aricle was declined at AFC. I regret I should not have said the word honeytrap, because some users like you is misinterpreting it. My basic motive here is to delete this article rather than trapping the sock. Please try to accept that. You are still saying my whole motive behind this AFD was to prove my point. But thats not correct and is just your assumption. Regards. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 12:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. @Kashmorwiki: Please perform a better WP:BEFORE prior to nominating articles for deletion. Kolma8 (talk) 14:01, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply to Kolma8: I dont know how did you came to the conclusion that I havent done proper WP:Before. By the waylet me ask you somethings. Did you know the exact copy of this draft was declined at AFC ? Did you know that I was the person who adviced the creator of this article to find more sources that give sigcov? Did you know I done a WP:Before in both English and Malayalam to find any sources so that I can accept it in AFC? Did you know the creator and his socks abused me just because I declined thier drafts and asked about using multiple accounts? So my advice is to you is that before accussing anyone blindly, try to understand the exact things happened here and dont take anything personally.What I said is that lot of sources exist here, but none of them give enough sigcov to the subject. Plenty of source does not alone make anyone notable. Thats my point. Regards. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 16:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Kashmorwiki, don't take it personally it will cause nothing but stress. On my books @Beccaynr: did a great example of WP:BEFORE to support a keep vote. You might disagree that the sources provided is enough to support GNG, but that is a different issue. Cheers, Kolma8 (talk) 05:25, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • And I did not accuse you of anything; I politely asked you of something... In return you should do the same, my friend. Your tone is rather aggressive or maybe I am just reading in it too much. When you start three questions in a row with "Did you know..." and then add "So my advice to you is..." that does not read as a nice answer. So stay calm and stress free. Thank you. Kolma8 (talk) 05:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • Kolma8, you just said to me please perform a WP:Before. It is indirectly an accusation that I havent done a proper WP:Before. Let me say you one thing. This is a discussion and it is not only me, who have the oponion to delete. Some other users have also the same opinion as mine. You can disagree or agree with anyone. I dont have any issue with that. But you dont have the right to simply say that other users havent done this or that. Yes, Beccanyr found some sources. In my opinion these are not sufficient to passing GNG and I already said that. Does that mean I havent done WP:Before? Thats why I said you to do not say the things that you dont have an idra about. By the way, I havent done anything aggressive here. I dont know if asking some questions to prove my part is any part of aggression. Also advising another users is not a bad thing in my opinion. It is indeed required for our development in any fields. Anyway if you feel that I got aggressive with you, I take this opportunity to apologize you. Regards. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 06:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
          Kashmorwiki: Good deal, my friend! Stay well, respect the fellow wikifolks and apostrophes, and remember that irony is the hygiene of the mind. Kolma8 (talk) 16:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Per WP:BASIC,If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability, and the sources set forth above show WP:SUSTAINED coverage over time in multiple independent sources that transcend any one political position he has held, and include his personal biographical information, his film, and his notable social media presence. Beccaynr (talk) 18:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete there is a dearth of independent, persistent coverage in reliable sources to pass WP:BASIC, and no indication that the subject reaches WP:ANYBIO. ——Serial 18:50, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It may be relevant to note that the article for Divya S. Iyer, a former Sub-Collector who moved into another political role (but not a national one like Nair) and had a film role (but did not make a film as Nair did), was recently kept. Some of Iyer's national news coverage focused on her high-profile marriage, while Nair has sustained national news coverage over time as the 'Collector Bro' and his use of his social media platform for public service, regardless of his political position. Both articles need revisions to incorporate additional sources, but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Beccaynr (talk) 14:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have created a source assessment table below for news sources from 2015 through 2018 that appear to support WP:BASIC and WP:GNG notability due to the significant and in-depth coverage, and also appear to show "significant press coverage" for WP:NPOL notability:
Beccaynr (talk) 00:05, 1 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Prashanth_Nair_(IAS)&oldid=1265779512"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prashanth Nair (IAS), released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.