Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shankar Pamarthy

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 no consensus. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:25, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shankar Pamarthy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

PROD material which I considered but chose AfD instead for clarity, G4 (if it's ever needed) and in case familiar attention is needed, not to mention this is also borderline speedy material. Questionably notable and improvable as searches simply found nothing better than this, this, this and this so unless he's locally notable and significant, there's not much convincingly better. Notifying author Babji Goud and past user and tagger Sitush. SwisterTwister talk 08:21, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 08:21, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 08:21, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Animation-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 08:21, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: The article has no WP:RS because it does not have significant coverage.Pixarh (talk) 15:52, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:38, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I have added WP:RS to article. Cartoonist is covered in depth in multiple independent reliable sources and meets WP:NOTEBLP. Pamarthy is also a well recognized artist who has achieved national and international recognition in his field. Unfortunately, the editor who created the original article was not well-versed in Wikipedia policy. There are more reliable sources out there, and the article could use more work. --Bejnar (talk) 19:31, 13 December 2015 (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.