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. Killiondude ( talk) 08:03, 4 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Nutan Naidu (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Once I'd got through the peacockery, and reformatted the pseudo-references to other Wiki articles into bluelinks, and done a Google search, there was nothing left but for two trivial mentions and some social sites. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Narky Blert ( talk) 04:21, 25 February 2018 (UTC) reply

(NB Article creator User:Sumitmpsd has been blocked indefinitely for sockpuppetry) Narky Blert ( talk) 04:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. MT Train ^Talk 05:06, 25 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MT Train ^Talk 05:06, 25 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Non-notable and only serves to promote the subject. MT Train ^Talk 11:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Nothing stated here passes WP:NPOL, this is formatted like a résumé (with weird digressions into poetry) rather than an encyclopedia article, and there's no evidence that he passes WP:GNG — once I stripped all the invalid WP:CIRCULAR "references" to other Wikipedia articles, all that was left was a primary source candidate financial report, of the type that doesn't demonstrate a candidate as notable because every candidate has to file one, and a single news article which glancingly namechecks his existence without being about him in any substantive or non-trivial way. As well, there's possibly a WP:COI of some kind here, as the creator's username suggests that they may be the same person as the author of the news article — so even if he has no personal connection to Naidu beyond admiring him, the "self-citing your own work" problem would still pertain. As always, Wikipedia is not a free alternative to LinkedIn on which a person is entitled to have an article just because he exists — to get an article on here, a person has to satisfy our notability standards. But there's no evidence whatsoever that Naidu does, and even if he did this article is written so awfully that the "blow it up and start over from scratch" treatment would still apply. Bearcat ( talk) 17:32, 26 February 2018 (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.