Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yogesh Mehta

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. Randykitty (talk) 16:39, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yogesh Mehta

[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)

Fails WP:BIO, No real secondary coverage in the first two ref blocks.Refs are PR, interviews, x of y articles and profiles. WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:DEL4. scope_creep^Talk 19:07, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, United Arab Emirates, and Maharashtra. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:09, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, $Salvio giuliano$ 21:53, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: plenty of significant coverage here. There is no objection to interviews, profiles, and so on, so long as the sources are reliable and independent of the subject. Moonraker (talk) 20:32, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well actually there is. Interview are WP:SPS sources and can't be used to establish notability unless the peson is a model. Lets examine the references on the first two blocks:

Ref 1: [1] This is an interview. Its an WP:SPS source and is WP:PRIMARY.
Ref 2: [2]] Another interview in the same mag. Its an WP:SPS source and is WP:PRIMARY.
Ref 3 [3] This is an x of y article and is non-rs.
Ref 4 [4]] Another interview.
Ref 5 [5] X of Y article, likely non-rs
Ref 6 [6] X of Y article. 25 richest. Likely non-rs.
Ref 7 [7] X of Y article. 50 richest Likely non-rs.
Ref 8 Rich list. X of Y article. Likely non-rs
Ref 9 [8] Indian power list. X of Y article. Likely non-rs
Ref 10 [9] Profile, WP:PROMO article.
Ref 11 [10]] PR. Another profile. Interview but not significant.
Ref 12 [11] Another interview.
Ref 13 [https://gulfbusiness.com/uaes-new-reality-show-to-debut-in-october/ Passing mention.
Ref 14 [12] Another interview.
Ref 15 [13] Another interview.

There is not a single WP:SECONDARY source in the whole lot. 8 of the 15 are by Arabian Business, which is similar to Forbes, producing lots of x of y articles and likely non-rs in a similar manner to forbes. While WP:V seems to be satisfied here, as it verifies he exists, it doesn't prove he is notable per WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 10:31, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While I agree that some of the sources are thin, The Arabian Business article "The Good Life" is solid, and The Gulf News "Rise of Petrochem CEO Yogesh Mehta" makes use of many quotes but is more than an interview - it does not use the Q&A format of an interview, but intersperses reporting with quotes. Taken together with the critical article in NewsLaundry, I think this meets GNG. BTW, NewsLaundry is on the list of reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lamona (talk • contribs)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 22:14, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. AShiv1212 (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and source evaluation above. BLPs need proper sourcing for content and notability. Sources are primary, promotion, listing, etc type mentions. Gulf News article is a mention and promotional. Nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 21:04, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The NewsLaundry is about an company incident only vaguely related to the subject of the article. The Gulf News derives all of its information from the interview so it is not independent. There are not enough independent and reliable information to make a detailed article about this person. Carpimaps (talk) 15:35, 11 March 2023 (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.