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. Sarahj2107 ( talk) 10:55, 17 November 2016 (UTC) reply

P. K. Raman (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Almost entirely unsourced biography. The one references doesn't meet WP:RS. Full of WP:PEACOCK language (the legendary K.R. Gowri..., He played key-role in distributing [sic], etc.) Overly promotional. Zackmann08 ( ^{Talk to me}/ _{What I been doing}) 19:13, 19 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 20:10, 19 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 20:10, 19 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Commment. A fundamental problem with this article is verifiability. The subject would pass WP:POLITICIAN as a MLA, but I don't find him mentioned in the citation given nor in independent searches. • Gene93k ( talk) 20:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 20:13, 19 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• To be fair, I did find one mention of P. K. Raman in the listed reference — but it's as the losing candidate in his electoral district that year, with no indication given whatsoever as to whether he was an incumbent or not. If somebody can actually find a similar table for 1949 which shows him winning his seat, that would aid his passage of WP:NPOL, but the source provided here as of right now entirely fails to verify the claim being cited to it. I'm willing to withdraw this comment if somebody can actually locate real verification that he actually served in the state legislature — but in an encyclopedia where we have seen hoax articles created about people who were claimed to have served in a legislature but actually did not, we can't keep an article in which the claim of having served is unverified. Delete, unless somebody can locate at least one source which confirms his service. Bearcat ( talk) 23:33, 19 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• delete - The only reference says completely the opposite of claim in article. K. R. Gowri Amma beat P. K. Raman 14248 to 7261. With no other sources appears to be totally non-notable. KylieTastic ( talk) 16:18, 30 October 2016 (UTC) reply

The source might say she beat him in 1951, but the article claims he had been the incumbent since 1949. There is no contradiction there. -- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 21:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi Andreas Philopater the location the source is linked it says "P K Raman was elected" when he lost according to the link. The claim that before that he was the incumbent and "He defeated the legendary K. R. Gowri Amma in that contest." is unsourced.

According to the link he lost in 1951. That he was elected in 1949 is unsourced. But those two statements are not in contradiction to one another. -- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 00:17, 6 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi Andreas Philopater - who said those contradicted each other? The only contradiction mentioned is that the actual statement that has the source linked. i.e "P K Raman was elected" followed by the sources that says he was not. KylieTastic ( talk) 11:20, 6 November 2016 (UTC) reply

I'm sorry, I took "says completely the opposite" to mean that the one contradicted the other. If that isn't what you meant, nothing I have said is relevant. -- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 19:53, 6 November 2016 (UTC) reply

• Delete in this case since, although MLAs are in fact notable, I'm not finding an actual source, and there's nothing else otherwise better, and this is clearly because it's from nearly 2 centuries ago. SwisterTwister talk 04:07, 13 November 2016 (UTC) reply

1949 is two centuries ago? Did we pass through a wormhole and nobody told me? Bearcat ( talk) 00:08, 14 November 2016 (UTC) reply

A rounding error? -- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 08:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Ah, yes, I also meant the fact he was born in 1888, but the fact there was both no Internet in India in the 1940s and 1950s, and any newspapers available, would quite likely not be available now. SwisterTwister talk 19:08, 14 November 2016 (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.